Tom E Curran is on fire: Hangs Wells with his own words on his defiance about being independent

As everyone here knows, Brady's "I don't think so" was when the 10.1 lie was out there. A loss of 2.4 PSI likely sounded like a lot so he was as uncertain as anyone about what happened.

BelichickFan said:

As everyone here knows, Brady's "I don't think so" was when the 10.1 lie was out there. A loss of 2.4 PSI likely sounded like a lot so he was as uncertain as anyone about what happened.

Click to expand...

I think Tom said "I don't believe so" (?)

Tom may have had some uncertainty about the ball preparation stuff (making them "tacky") and the 10.1 PSI report certainly would have introduced enough confusion to make Tom doubt the process somewhat, IMO. That's why the letter was sent.

EDIT: Maybe it was "I don't think so". Too painful to go back an watch that presser. "What about the children?"

borg said:

Curran has grabbed the Free Brady baton and never let go. Next Kentucky Derby, Brady needs to make room on the private Jet for his #1 defender. TC is relentless.

Click to expand...

What's sad is that he is actually being objective!

Actually a great move by the nfl saying this then pointing out it is in cba. The nfl could have hired eric mangini, Rex ryan, kurt warner and Mark Brunell to investigate this and they would have been well within their rights to do so.

Cuts the nflpa legs out from under them because it takes away one of their main aurgeuments

ensoul said:

Actually a great move by the nfl saying this then pointing out it is in cba. The nfl could have hired eric mangini, Rex ryan, kurt warner and Mark Brunell to investigate this and they would have been well within their rights to do to.

Cuts the nflpa legs out from under them because it takes away one of their main aurgeuments

Click to expand...

Not really, as their statements about the investigation and the investigator are thus shown to be untruthful. This means they might win the battle but lose the war as the defamation case would be a slam-dunk.

ensoul said:

Actually a great move by the nfl saying this then pointing out it is in cba. The nfl could have hired eric mangini, Rex ryan, kurt warner and Mark Brunell to investigate this and they would have been well within their rights to do to.

Cuts the nflpa legs out from under them because it takes away one of their main aurgeuments

Click to expand...

by the same token, precedence precludes any suspension for the player......the league would now be left to try to convince anyone about integrity.......not going to happen

ensoul said:

Actually a great move by the nfl saying this then pointing out it is in cba. The nfl could have hired eric mangini, Rex ryan, kurt warner and Mark Brunell to investigate this and they would have been well within their rights to do to.

Cuts the nflpa legs out from under them because it takes away one of their main aurgeuments

Click to expand...

Exactly. The NFL is interpretating the CBA in the most literal way possible and making it a strength in their case.

It is also saying essentially, "The CBA doesn't say we have to or can't do X and in these instances it is our province to decide what is best.".

This is as hard line as you can get.

"The NFLPA has resisted explaining that its position in the Tom Brady litigation is essentially this: “Even if Tom Brady did it, you can’t suspend him for it.” Putting it that way would open the floodgates for allegations that BRADY HAS ADMITTED IT!, even though that wouldn’t be the case."

While I'm glad Florio broached this subject, I wish he had gone the next step to explain that, since this suit is about the fairness of the appeal, arguments based on the initial evidence aren't as helpful. He leaves it hanging out there for trolls to nibble on.

If I were to ask McCann a few questions, it would be

1) How much weight does Goodell's documented lie have?

2) After publicly lauding Wells' integrity and independence, how much weight does Pash's editing of the report have?

3) Does the NFL's ploy that Wells didn't have to be independent resolve this issue? Even if they had assured the Patriots that he was?

BelichickFan said:

As everyone here knows, Brady's "I don't think so" was when the 10.1 lie was out there. A loss of 2.4 PSI likely sounded like a lot so he was as uncertain as anyone about what happened.

Click to expand...

Its a fact that if the balls were at 10.1 PSI it means they were screwed with. So of course he was confused and on the defensive, he was wondering who on earth did this. Of then it turned out that the information was a complete fabrication.

BelichickFan said:

As everyone here knows, Brady's "I don't think so" was when the 10.1 lie was out there. A loss of 2.4 PSI likely sounded like a lot so he was as uncertain as anyone about what happened.

Click to expand...

The thing is Brady actually denied cheating in that same press conference. Here are excerpts from that press conference from Mike Reiss' write up:

Thursday that he has not yet been contacted by the NFL about its investigation into underinflated footballs, adding: "I didn't alter the ball in any way."

Click to expand...

Asked if he sought out members of the Patriots' equipment staff to inquire if they altered the balls in any way Sunday, Brady said: "Yeah, and they haven't, and I believe them. They also know how I like it and that's exactly the way they are."

Click to expand...

"I feel like I have always played within the rules," he said. "I would never break the rules."

Click to expand...

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story...ady-new-england-patriots-says-alter-footballs

But everyone focuses on the "I don't believe so" comment.

BTW, that second quote kinda even shoots more holes in Goodell's and Well's claims that Brady denied ever talking to Jastremski about the footballs on those telephone calls.

ensoul said:

Actually a great move by the nfl saying this then pointing out it is in cba. The nfl could have hired eric mangini, Rex ryan, kurt warner and Mark Brunell to investigate this and they would have been well within their rights to do so.

Cuts the nflpa legs out from under them because it takes away one of their main aurgeuments

Click to expand...

I'll also make a reply to this.

Actually, I think this was a huge mistake for the NFL because the judge could well rule that, regardless of whether or not it is in the CBA, the NFL promised an independent investigation and then didn't deliver making the process unfair. There's more to living up to the law than just abiding by the rules of the CBA (not that the NFL even does that on any consistent basis under Goodell).