EXONERATING EVIDENCE REVEALED IN APPEAL!!!

I do not think that the judge is going to do too much slogging through the science.

There are much more obvious pieces of exonerating evidence relevant to the CBA issues in dispute:

1) Vincent admits that no players never are given a copy of the NFL operations manual, thus Brady is being punished for violating statutes for which he would have no knowledge and that do not apply to players.

2) Wells makes it clear that Brady was never advised of any punishments that would arise should he not provide actual transcripts of text messages or provide a phone. The CBA specifies that players must be made aware of possible punishments for NFL rules infractions.

3) The transcript of Brady's testimony regarding conversations with JJ after the AFCCG show that Goodell grossly mischaracterized Brady's testimony. Brady did not say that all of the discussion was about Super Bowl prep. He went into detail about how he wanted to know if JJ was OK and to get to the bottom of the accusations, which were the lead story on CNN. This shows that Goodell's punishment was tainted by his arbitrary and capricious misinterpretation of the facts.

(others?)

cmasspatsfan said:

This is the main problem with this fiasco, they weren't dealing with finely tuned instruments, this whole thing never should have happened without precise protocols in place.

Click to expand...

Exactly. The Colts measured the intercepted ball three times and got three different results, ranging from 11.35 to 11.75. And that was on the field, where the temperature change in the locker room wasn't a factor. Given that they only measured the Patriots footballs once each with each gauge, we don't know what variations we would have seen after, say, 3 measurements with the logo gauge.

simply put, the NFL cannot prove at this time that in its history, a single game was ever played with properly inflated footballs....except for maybe the most recent SB

IllegalContact said:

this is the kind of stuff I come up with at 2:20am standing at the toilet pissing with my phone in one hand and my **** in the other

Click to expand...

No selfies plz

Tony2046 said:

I like your effort but that is not what it says. It says I don't know what kind of differential the Patriots gauge had.

The NFL argues that if the Patriots footballs showed up at 12.17 then why didn't the Colts footballs show up at 12.68? They then argue that both the Colts and the Patriots And Walt Anderson would all have to have gauges out of calibration by the same rate.

Click to expand...

Actually, Anderson stated the Colt balls came in around 13.0 to 13.1 - this would be what they read out as on the Logo gauge if the Colts actually inflated their balls to the maximum of 13.5. Still fully possible. There's no evidence from any Colt saying what inflation level they preferred. Could simply be a case of the Colts preferring the max and the Pats preferring the min.

Bledsoehasaring said:

I stand corrected he has broke the case.

Click to expand...

Your username is great because I forget that it's true

Ross12 said:

Actually, Anderson stated the Colt balls came in around 13.0 to 13.1 - this would be what they read out as on the Logo gauge if the Colts actually inflated their balls to the maximum of 13.5. Still fully possible. There's no evidence from any Colt saying what inflation level they preferred. Could simply be a case of the Colts preferring the max and the Pats preferring the min.

Click to expand...

To me it is pretty simple. They were investigating for competitive advantage. 0.3 is not. No one was trying to circumvent the rules to gain an advantage. So why wreck a 15 year hall of fame career over this BS?

i read this post last night, and was very confused. Now, as I am at page 258, i am at this part of the report, and i realize what this thread is actually about, but wasnt worded clearly.
During Troy Vincent's questioning by Kessler, Kessler says the actual notes from the halftime measurements, so the sheet with all the pats/colts balls measurements, actually says "Belonging to JJ" at the top of the sheet, right next to a measurement of 11.8 psi.

Q. And then finally, going back to NFL,Exhibit 14, which are the notes you signed, and I want to look back on page 256. It states here, ifyou look at the -- this is the two different tests. And I'm looking at the one where it says, "Tests by Darrel" -- is it "Prioleau" ["pray-loo"phonetically]?
A. That's correct.
Q. It says here, "Belonging to JJ."
Do you see that right at the top? Right next to the 11.8, it says, "Belonging to JJ."
A. Mm-hmm.
Q. Now, you signed these notes, right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. This page you signed, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know what "belonging to JJ" refers to?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know if that refers to the fact thatthe gauge used by Mr. Prioleau was, in fact, a gauge that belonged to Mr. Jastremski?
A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. So you don't know what that refers to?
A. No, sir.

Click to expand...

That means to me, that the data associated with Prioleau would be from Jastremski's gauge. which means that jastremskis gauge is the logo gauge.

jpat said:

i read this post last night, and was very confused. Now, as I am at page 258, i am at this part of the report, and i realize what this thread is actually about, but wasnt worded clearly.
During Troy Vincent's questioning by Kessler, Kessler says the actual notes from the halftime measurements, so the sheet with all the pats/colts balls measurements, actually says "Belonging to JJ" at the top of the sheet, right next to a measurement of 11.8 psi.


That means to me, that the data associated with Prioleau would be from Jastremski's gauge. which means that jastremskis gauge is the logo gauge.

Click to expand...

This was covered. The said that the Patriots lawyer, the woman that Pash treating like **** in the emails (Gagnon?) told him to write that on there, and then later said she was wrong.

edit- nevermind

AndyJohnson said:

This was covered. The said that the Patriots lawyer, the woman that Pash treating like **** in the emails (Gagnon?) told him to write that on there, and then later said she was wrong.

Click to expand...

Oh, right, Wells later says that Robyn was confused and that wasn't the case. I guess we should all trust wells, right? I mean, obviously it wasn't the patriots gauge since they know where that gauge is....

jpat said:

Oh, right, Wells later says that Robyn was confused and that wasn't the case. I guess we should all trust wells, right? I mean, obviously it wasn't the patriots gauge since they know where that gauge is....

Click to expand...

If that's a lie then she can clear it up. I'm just saying this isn't exoneration because it was addressed elsewhere in the report.

Koma said:

Exactly. The Colts measured the intercepted ball three times and got three different results, ranging from 11.35 to 11.75. And that was on the field, where the temperature change in the locker room wasn't a factor. Given that they only measured the Patriots footballs once each with each gauge, we don't know what variations we would have seen after, say, 3 measurements with the logo gauge.

Click to expand...

Question: When the measure the balls, do they do that by weighing or sticking an air pressure gauge in via a ball pin? My guess and belief is 2 but want to make sure. Because if that is the case, every time you check a ball it is difficult to not let a little air out. Hell, if your an opposing team trying to look good in front of your "detective" GM you could "accidentally" let a lot of air out each time you check.

End this BS frame job and let the NFL world talk about Johnny Manzel or some other inferior team.

IllegalContact said:

simply put, the NFL cannot prove at this time that in its history, a single game was ever played with properly inflated footballs....except for maybe the most recent SB

Click to expand...

Yes, good point. And if my memory serves me correctly, TB12 threw the ball around that night with precise accuracy and his guts and poise reminded me a bit of................well TB12!

AndyJohnson said:

If that's a lie then she can clear it up. I'm just saying this isn't exoneration because it was addressed elsewhere in the report.

Click to expand...

Maybe it was her "best recollection", those don't carry much weight with wells, though.

Wells carries even less weight with us.

Tony2046 said:

To me it is pretty simple. They were investigating for competitive advantage. 0.3 is not. No one was trying to circumvent the rules to gain an advantage. So why wreck a 15 year hall of fame career over this BS?

Click to expand...

Exactly. If the NFL and its leadership had any integrity and cojones to do whats right rather than what the mob wanted, they would have (if they honestly believe their was a violation)

1. actually state the amount they believe the balls were deflated by
2. if it was small (which it should have been), explain that it was a small, if any competitive advantage
3. discipline appropriately (slap on the wrist) like other similar offenses
4. call out the media for its sensationalist handling of the matter
5. pledge to better control the balls going forward.
6. institute a rule calling for tougher discipline going forward.

Just as with spygate, its largely the punishment and rhetoric that accompanies these things that stamps it in sports history as something significant - - when its not.

Well this is interesting. Still trying to digest it all but found this report regarding gauge accuracies.

Talks about gauge accuracy. Battery state could affect accuracy.

[No Gauge] had an accuracy specification. You can see with the analogue ones that the demarcations are every 0.5 psi. Best case this implies an accuracy of +/-0.5 psi, and for 13 psi, +/-4%. More realistically I suspect their accuracies are closer to +/-1 psi, about +/-10%. The Mikasa digital one seems to display to nearest 0.01 psi. The Tachikara digital (this looks exactly like the Wilson gauge)one seems to say it measures to nearest 0.05 psi. Best case this implies an accuracy of +/-0.05 psi, and for 13 psi, 0.4%. More realistically I suspect the digital accuracies are closer to +/-0.1 psi, about +/-1%. Display resolution does not convey meter accuracy. Accuracy is a function of the pressure transducer, it’s range, resolution, and implementation within meter. The battery state could affect accuracy. There are many variables for accuracy. It must be specified by the manufacturer. The accuracy needs to include the confidence that the measured values falls within the specified UOM range, which for product safety must be at least 95%, coverage factor, k=2.

There’s also the need for ongoing meter calibration. Product safety labs calibrate electrical meters every 1 year, in order to verify that meters have maintained their accuracy. Calibration meters have UOM accuracies of at least 4x better than the meter being calibrated. One can see with the 5%, 1% meters row, that the calibration meter's UOM has only a minor contribution to the meter being calibrated's overall UOM.

http://www.obcompman.com/what-s-new/deflatedfootballsanduom

And we all know batteries stay fresh if you keep them in the freezer, so by extension, a battery out in the cold conditions of the field...

Oh never mind.

I got a friend of mine who's a mechanical engineer, and has had to both use and calibrate gauges, and he explained their workings, which is similar to above.
each gauge is manufactured with an error range expressed as a % of it's measurement range, so you might have gauges that measure to 1%, 2%, etc, and this all depends on the money you put into them.
as a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure exponent bought 50 gauges and tested them all, so you can see that spread with a new gauge of whatever particular type in the appendix, and it's maybe going to be +/- 0.1 - 0.2 psi.

I think it was the aei report that mentioned accuracy drift, which just means that over time a gauge may lose accuracy, which is why you'd have the one gauge reading 0.4 psi off --- that's probably an older gauge that hasn't been calibrated, because there's 0.00% chance the nfl ever calibrates a gauge.
they raised the interesting issue that the patriots' gauge could also have experienced this drift if it was similarly an older gauge.

but, really, all this is fairly irrelevant because we're discussing stuff to the tenth of a pound psi when there is absolutely nothing in this process that's accurate to anywhere near that degree.
it's just absolutely ridiculous and embarrassing when people with no science background start playing inspector gadget.

to go back to that tired tire analogy, over what range of psi do you seriously think your tires can change?
do you think they might possibly change by a tenth of a psi?
would you notice or be able to measure it if they did?
all these balls experience a tenth of a psi change anytime their temp changes a couple degrees.

edit: to use another analogy,, what if I was really concerned with my weight and decided to measure it to the ounce every day using my bathroom scale --- wouldn't that seem fairly asinine?