Online Petitions Thread

Please forgive me if this has already been mentioned.

My problem with the Wells report is the entire basis of it relies upon what a ref half remembers were ball ball psis before the game was played.

All this nonsense about a point-psi here or there... they interviewed Walt Anderson about what he half-remembers the initial psis were to start the game, then they pretend his recollections are the basis on which to launch a multi-million dollar 'study'.

EDIT: To include the following: They trust Anderson's recollection as sacrosanct, yet Wells finds reason to unilaterally say "Anderson is wrong" when it comes to the pregame gauge he says he used...

Sciz said:

Their texts show plenty of things they did wrong, even if that doesn't include illegally deflating footballs.

Click to expand...

It does but when the Patriots said that the NFL required them to suspend them (or at least, requested it) I believe the team...

The NFL later publicly denied it but Troy Vincent's initial statement that "neither of these individuals may be reinstated without the approval of the NFL" it seems pretty clear to me that this was a decision primarily of the NFL

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...nfl-releases-statement-on-patriots-violations

Thus I'm not quite clear on why any of the Haters view this as a smoking gun - but then again, logic and reason means VERY little to such fans who are just as jealous, jaded, ignorant and gullible as Roger Goodell HOPED they would be

Jercules said:

Please forgive me if this has already been mentioned.

My problem with the Wells report is the entire basis of it relies upon what a ref half remembers were ball ball psis before the game was played.

All this nonsense about a point-psi here or there... they interviewed Walt Anderson about what he half-remembers the initial psis were to start the game, then they pretend his recollections are the basis on which to launch a multi-million dollar 'study'.

EDIT: To include the following: They trust Anderson's recollection as sacrosanct, yet Wells finds reason to unilaterally say "Anderson is wrong" when it comes to the pregame gauge he says he used...

Click to expand...

Anderson, a respected 25 year veteran official selected to be in charge of a game in which the AFC's Super Bowl representative would be decided, states that it's his "best recollection" that he used the gauge with the Wilson logo on it

The NFL accepts all of his "best recollections" about all other aspects of that game

They reject the one and only one of his "recollections" - the pivotal one that he knows is THE crux of this entire "investigation"

His best recollection is effectively that there was NO unusual deflation

Ted Wells, working at the behest of an NFL Commissioner who by all appearances wanted a "guilty" finding regardless of reality, had no choice but to reject Anderson's "best recollection"

Doesn't sound fishy at all, does it?

The sad thing is, for the majority of fans in the NFL, that all makes perfect logical sense

Kenneth Sims said:

When would McNally be left alone in the officials locker room? Where are the officials? trying to fit into a little car to drive into the stadium.

Click to expand...

The refs supposedly go out on the field, although I'm not sure he's actually alone.
I think gostkowski, or somebody, hangs out in there to watch TV, so he'd be in on it, too
Maybe it was Ryan allen

VectorPrime said:

Seriously, how has NOONE asked this? It seems like the most obvious hole in the entire case. Has anyone, even Curran, even alluded to it? What the fuuuuck

Click to expand...

There have been people comparing his home and road stats all along.

The actual deflation thing went out the window a long time ago -- this is just an old fashioned mugging at this point

I must say...this thread has been a HUGE blessing. Posters like @JoeSixPat are absolutely on fire! I love it when people are dedicated to the truth, and want to look for answers!!!!

Fencer said:

If you want to equate all this to domestic abuse in which people are physically injured, that's problematic.

Now, a case can be made that, based on the magnitude of the punishments, the NFL has made the comparison. Fine. Refer to that if you want. But I wouldn't make the case in your own name.

Click to expand...

Why should corruption and malfeasance be any less worrying than domestic abuse?

Chiuba E. Obele said:

Why should corruption and malfeasance be any less worrying than domestic abuse?

Click to expand...

Really ????
Come on now ....

IcyPatriot said:

Really ????
Come on now ....

Click to expand...

Seriously....how is it any worse?

IcyPatriot said:

Really ????
Come on now ....

Click to expand...

On the suface one can say they are grossly different. Deliberately attacking someone's credibility and intending harm on an emotional and physical level (Brady being reported sick and affected by the accusation) is exactly the same as being DV, true. However, this whole issue is based on a league which mishandles everything put in front of it and the Rice situation is a part of that.

ViperGTS said:

On the suface one can say they are grossly different. Deliberately attacking someone's credibility and intending harm on an emotional and physical level (Brady being reported sick and affected by the accusation) is exactly the same as being DV, true. However, this whole issue is based on a league which mishandles everything put in front of it and the Rice situation is a part of that.

Click to expand...

That's exactly where I make the connection. It's not a direct comparison between physical violence and purposely defaming, misleading and deceiving a team. It's more so the pattern of behavior by the NFL, when it comes to both these issues.

And let's not fool ourselves here. There's more than one way to skin a cat. And there's more than one way to cause harm to an individual. You don't need to physically abuse someone in order to cause harm. If a group lies to the public, attempts to defame and wrongfully accuse an individual of wrongdoing, and intentionally withholds information - you are committing a grievous act of corruption. It's as simple as that.

You can also add that there's a breach of trust, when your malfeasance damages your trust and credibility in the eyes of the public. Whenever Goodell f.ucks up, he does harm to the image of the League, and he ought to be held accountable for that, in the same we want Ray Rice to be accountable for his actions.

Let's not forget the lingering effects of slandering. Tom Brady will spend to rest of his life trying to ward off accusations of cheating. And how will he try to explain this to his children, when they hear about their father being a "cheater." Tom Brady is suffering. He may not want to show it, but there's no denying the kind of emotional toll that has on people.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

Why should corruption and malfeasance be any less worrying than domestic abuse?

Click to expand...

Do you have any friends who were abused children or abused wives/girlfriends?

Fencer said:

Do you have any friends who were abused children or abused wives/girlfriends?

Click to expand...

Regardless, would you say that both are wrong and both shouldn't be allowed to continue?

ViperGTS said:

Regardless, would you say that both are wrong and both shouldn't be allowed to continue?

Click to expand...

Of course. But if I wished to persuade people, I wouldn't give the impression that I thought they were equivalent.

Fencer said:

Of course. But if I wished to persuade people, I wouldn't give the impression that I thought they were equivalent.

Click to expand...

It's how the League responds to domestic violence - not domestic violence itself. A league that fails to investigate domestic violence seriously, is a league whose interests and priorities don't align with the fans or the interest of the public. That same league - if its incapable of ethical leadership - is just as likely to mislead the public and fabricate evidence against a team. We're talking about the actions of the NFL - not the relationship between domestic violence and corruption.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

It's how the League responds to domestic violence - not domestic violence itself. A league that fails to investigate domestic violence seriously, is a league whose interests and priorities don't align with the fans or the interest of the public. That same league - if its incapable of ethical leadership - is just as likely to mislead the public and fabricate evidence against a team. We're talking about the actions of the NFL - not the relationship between domestic violence and corruption.

Click to expand...

My advice to you is that the way you drew the analogy in your opening paragraph is terrible, if your goal is to persuade people.

At least flip the points. First say that corruption is terrible. Then, if you must, draw the analogy to other kinds of bad acts.

The way it reads now, it looks at first like it's about domestic violence, and then the reader has to scramble and reset his expectations to keep up.

Fencer said:

At least flip the points. First say that corruption is terrible. Then, if you must, draw the analogy to other kinds of bad acts.

The way it reads now, it looks at first like it's about domestic violence, and then the reader has to scramble and reset his expectations to keep up.

Click to expand...

See I don't read it that way. However, write it up how you think it would be better and we can look at it. I'm all for people's input. It's the only way we will get this done.

If the NFL officials told tell Ted Wells that they didn't take the Colts report seriously before the game, why did they make the unprecedented move of testing the pressure of the footballs at halftime? They made the jump from "no big deal, teams complain about stuff all the time" to "serious investigation" very quickly.

Were the NFL people completely honest when they told Wells they didn't think the Colts accusation was important? Why did the Colts feel they could test a ball on the sideline, which was a rules violation, instead of asking a game official to check it? Why was Troy Vincent available to supervise the testing at halftime? Given his stature in the league, he probably watched the 1st half from a luxury box. Why would he agree to be pulled away for what Wells characterized as a "joke" instead of delegating it to someone else?

The email being forwarded to multiple people, Walt Anderson being warned pre-game, and a plan put in place to test the balls at half time runs counter to the line of thinking that the league didn't think much of the Colts accusation.