Source: Brady's testimony "not entirely credible"

Ring 6 · Jun 25, 2015

Patstopia said:
I have to disagree on the steps of this process. If Tag or Roselle were running the NFL it would be;
1) Accusation
2) Warning letter i.e. "Heres the accusation, if this is happening, knock it off!"
3) End of story

It would never ever come down to turning the Championship game and the Super Bowl into a WWE event. It was an easily avoided situation which the league INTENTIONALLY caused!

In hindsight, I agree, but if the Patriots actually were guilty, I can't argue with the way they handled it.
If the Jets were accused of bribing refs, and they handled it the way this thing was done, and proved it true, I don't think anyone here would think it was wrong.

signbabybrady · Jun 25, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
This is my problem with a lot of this, people make up an answer and then act as if since it fits somewhat, it must be the only possibility. There are more logical answers to all the questions than an oddball conspiracy theory.

no it doesn't because there is no reason or justification for owners to railroad a team.

Because the Colts brought the intercepted ball to them and it was under 12.5

In order to find out if it was an abject attempt to circumvent the rules. If the balls were at 10.8 and science said they should be at 11.8 then the investigation would be necessary.

Wells didn't ignore the science, he contracted a company that did a bad job with it, and convinced him the science implied tampering.

Wrong information is leaked all the time, not correcting it was the gaffe. It doesn't take a conspiracy to understand that they didn't want to tip off the team they felt was guilty. The owners didn't do that, Mike Gardi did it.

See above.

They attempted to do that with Wells. The fact that he sucked does not indicate a conspiracy by owners to screw the Pats.

No one is saying they did a good job with this, just that its silly to say other owners conspired ot screw the Patriots.

Paranoid comments usually indicate paranoid thinking.

First, it isn't over yet.
Wells sucks. But its ridiculous to assume that an organization who hired him to investigate would be skeptical of his report before it was challenged. Brady has challenged. Only in Assumptionville where people have already decided that Goodell will ignore the appeal and its obvious proof that Wells got it wrong, has this also gone against the Patriots.
Wells IMO decided there was guilt early on, and set out to prove it. When you take that approach you give guilt the benefit of the doubt and consider claims of innocent to not be credible. It doesn't even have to be intentional.

We will see what happens, but if Goodell does not overturn the suspension it won't be because he is afraid to spend $5 million dollars, or that someone is telling him to screw the Patriots even though they did nothing wrong, it will be because he is very bad at this stuff, and really will believe he got it right.
Then it is up to the courts to fix it.

I hate that I am one of these tin foil hat guys right now but I can't make sense of this otherwise.

If you want to believe that this has been fair and balanced that is your right. And if Goodell overturns the decision you'll have evidence your right.

But when Goodell doesn't what's your explanation then?

signbabybrady · Jun 25, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
In hindsight, I agree, but if the Patriots actually were guilty, I can't argue with the way they handled it.
If the Jets were accused of bribing refs, and they handled it the way this thing was done, and proved it true, I don't think anyone here would think it was wrong.

I will admit that if we assume guilt than this isn't so crazy. And man would that mean the Patriots and Brady played this so insanely bad. but science has spoken to this point already.

BTTA · Jun 25, 2015

1960Pats said:
It's too bad that they cheated to get Luck though. I bet he would have done great with a real coach and team.

You know, the perspective on these things is amazing. The league says it is concerned foremost with the integrity of the game. The Colts do a "suck for Luck" campaign right in front of everyone, changing the outcome/score of games, and in doing so destroying the integrity of the playoff picture that year, and no one raises an eyebrow about it.

Ring 6 · Jun 25, 2015

signbabybrady said:
I hate that I am one of these tin foil hat guys right now but I can't make sense of this otherwise.

If you want to believe that this has been fair and balanced that is your right. And if Goodell overturns the decision you'll have evidence your right.

When have I ever said this has been anything resembling fair and balanced?
There is:
1) Paranoid conspiracy theory that everyone is out to get the Patriots
2) Fair and balanced
3) A million miles of things in between.

But when Goodell doesn't what's your explanation then?

I'm not saying he will overturn it, I'm saying that if he doesn't it won't be because he knows Brady is innocent but upholds it so people don't say he wasted $5,000,000, or because owners are conspiring against the Patriots, but that he is not very smart and incapable of seeing Brady is not guilty, despite the facts. He may be too stupid to get it right, but I don't believe he will be smart enough to know Brady is innocent, yet still uphold the punishment.

Ring 6 · Jun 25, 2015

signbabybrady said:
I will admit that if we assume guilt than this isn't so crazy. And man would that mean the Patriots and Brady played this so insanely bad. but science has spoken to this point already.

Correct. The lingering question is whether Exponent is that bad or Wells dictated the result.

YOUGOTMOSSED · Jun 25, 2015

When you have an adversary making the determination, of course he's going to find that that your testimony was "not credible" for obvious reasons. Goodell should have worn a kangaroo outfit to the hearing.

What a ridiculous farce this whole thing is!

IllegalContact · Jun 25, 2015

Certain aspects of this will be hard to fight in court........it will have to be all about the process that led to the suspension and precedence as well as bringing into question the impartiality of the league office during the process as well as Goodell's key words 'getting things right'

signbabybrady · Jun 25, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
When have I ever said this has been anything resembling fair and balanced?
There is:
1) Paranoid conspiracy theory that everyone is out to get the Patriots
2) Fair and balanced
3) A million miles of things in between.

I'm not saying he will overturn it, I'm saying that if he doesn't it won't be because he knows Brady is innocent but upholds it so people don't say he wasted $5,000,000, or because owners are conspiring against the Patriots, but that he is not very smart and incapable of seeing Brady is not guilty, despite the facts. He may be too stupid to get it right, but I don't believe he will be smart enough to know Brady is innocent, yet still uphold the punishment.

Sans some sort of conspiracy why wouldn't the NFL front office be fair and balanced?

And sorry but stupidity is not a more a valid explanation than a conspiracy.

aluminum seats · Jun 25, 2015

Could we let this thread drop please? I'm sure any of the comments would fit elsewhere. The title of it just gives me agita.

Ring 6 · Jun 25, 2015

IllegalContact said:
Certain aspects of this will be hard to fight in court........it will have to be all about the process that led to the suspension and precedence as well as bringing into question the impartiality of the league office during the process as well as Goodell's key words 'getting things right'

I think that an approach that states that these unionized employees are stuck with a system that violates their right to work by allowing an unacceptably low standard of proof, a rigged appeal process, and an arbiter who has proven to be inept and always overpunish, even though they agreed to it in a CBA, is valid grounds for a court case.
A union can agree to anything in a CBA, but that doesn't mean it is legal or enforceable. There is also a clear cut argument that the NFLPA caves in under duress caused by players with short term careers being put in a situation where they are pressured into a bad deal to not lose earnings.

Ring 6 · Jun 25, 2015

signbabybrady said:
Sans some sort of conspiracy why wouldn't the NFL front office be fair and balanced?

Competence.
I think its more Wells that prejudged the situation and was not fair and balanced, again not out of intent but because he thought he was the smartest guy in the room, and wanted a pelt for his wall.

And sorry but stupidity is not a more a valid explanation than a conspiracy.

Sure it is. Goodell has proven to be absolutely horrific at this part of his job.

Oswlek · Jun 25, 2015

signbabybrady said:
I hate that I am one of these tin foil hat guys right now but I can't make sense of this otherwise.

If you want to believe that this has been fair and balanced that is your right. And if Goodell overturns the decision you'll have evidence your right.

But when Goodell doesn't what's your explanation then?

It has not been fair and balanced. Just look at the facts.

1) The NFL either leaked biased data or intentionally failed to refute it.

2) They used incorrect data on an accusatory letter immediately after the AFCCG.

3) The NFL finally released the accurate data months later under the condition that NE could not release it.

4) The NFL went beyond every imaginable precedent when laying down punishment, including but not limited to:

a) Brady was considered a multiple offender despite having nothing to do with Spygate and recent precedent of Suh having his transgressions waived after less than two regular seasons and the Jets not being considered a multiple offender despite committing their third infraction since 2008.

b) The team was considered a multiple offender despite being cleared of all wrongdoing by the report itself.

c) Recent ball manipulation tactics were punished with $25,000 fines or simply a warning.

5) All science outside of the Wells report demonstrates that their results were, at best, inconclusive. Most consider it to be outright false.

6) The NFL's case rests entirely on the presumption that balls were surreptitiously deflated prior to the AFCCG. Without that, the texts and obstruction are little more than eyebrow raising.

7) Despite 5 and 6, the NFL quite clearly still believes that the Patriots are guilty of something, as evidenced by the "not credible" leak and the fact that Goodell didn't just vacate the penalty at the end of the session. Yes, due process can take time, but the Wells report has been under the microscope for weeks now and most of the defense's testimony was known going in.

Of course, there are also loads of inferences that supplement this, but the facts themselves spell it out clearly enough.

The Brandon Five · Jun 25, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Competence.
I think its more Wells that prejudged the situation and was not fair and balanced, again not out of intent but because he thought he was the smartest guy in the room, and wanted a pelt for his wall.

Sure it is. Goodell has proven to be absolutely horrific at this part of his job.

I don't think it is limited to "this part".

JMC00 · Jun 25, 2015

Oswlek said:
a) Brady was considered a multiple offender despite having nothing to do with Spygate and recent precedent of Suh having his transgressions waived after less than two regular seasons and the Jets not being considered a multiple offender despite committing their third infraction since 2008

This IMO is really the most egregious out of all the egregious things during this whole mess. Yet Brady is suppose to "take his medicine".

vyrago · Jun 25, 2015

AzorianPats said:
If so great tactic by Brady's team. Use the most credible source in probably all of sports, to throw out to the public good leaks that favor Brady.

Remember, this all went crazy with Mortonson's bogus leak.

Has anyone read any response from Mort to the fact that he was parroting bogus info?

Mack Herron · Jun 25, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Competence.
I think its more Wells that prejudged the situation and was not fair and balanced, again not out of intent but because he thought he was the smartest guy in the room, and wanted a pelt for his wall.

We should remember that Wells is not a judge, he is a litigator. His job is mainly as an advocate to mount the strongest defense for his clients. This role does not entail determining guilt or innocence. Instead, he is charged with using all means at his disposal support the position that his client is blameless and that the other side is wrong. I suspect it was no different here.

VectorPrime · Jun 25, 2015

Do you think if Brady had never thrown that bonehead interception into double coverage while we were running it down their throats that all this would have never happened? The thought of that makes me sick.

Ring 6 · Jun 25, 2015

Mack Herron said:
We should remember that Wells is not a judge, he is a litigator. His job is mainly as an advocate to mount the strongest defense for his clients. This role does not entail determining guilt or innocence. Instead, he is charged with using all means at his disposal support the position that his client is blameless and that the other side is wrong. I suspect it was no different here.

It makes perfect sense. That is what he does, he takes evidence and uses it to build the most compelling case he can. I suppose he walked in figuring they didn't hire him to find that nothing happened.

Jlaff · Jun 25, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Do you think if Brady had never thrown that bonehead interception into double coverage while we were running it down their throats that all this would have never happened? The thought of that makes me sick.

I don't think this sting was necessarily relying on the comically inept Colt's defence to produce a ball, but then again these guys are morons so that could have been part of the plan.

My guess is the measurements go down at half-time anyway.

What I've been wondering about lately...

What if the NFL FO actually had half a clue about a connection between temperature drops and PSI? Would they have made the mistake of recording numbers that fell within the range provided by the Ideal Gas Law (still find it hard to simply refer back to the "Ideal Gas Law", was unfamiliar with this technical term before and getting sick of reporters throwing the term around as if they had that knowledge in their back pocket the whole time). I don't recall any Patriot's being on hand to witness the recordings (they couldn't have been either, didn't have a clue Mort's report was a lie), my guess is if the NFL wasn't filled with morons, they may have altered the numbers to take into account the IGL. So thank goodness for their stupidity.

Source: Brady's testimony "not entirely credible"

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

Pro Bowl Player

He/Him

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Pro Bowl Player

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

Early Bird Specials

Similar threads