MIT Professor John Leonard at Michael McCann's framegate class on PSI

[Jackson 2]

I hear you. I'm still interested for my own edification. I'm also holding out hope that somehow the halftime measurements of the footballs this winter are released and it's shown that they all lose pressure naturally.

I'm not holding out hope but I think if the media puts pressure on the NFL to release the data that there is a small chance it could happen. I think that's the only way we get our draft picks back. It would also be hilarious to see the national reaction, hopefully at the same time Brady is holding #5 on a podium.

Agreed, that would be perhaps the greatest moment possible. As far as the ball pressure results from this season are concerned, I'm worried about just the opposite: the NFL will fudge the numbers intentionally to disprove the Ideal Gas Las and say, "See, we were correct. Brady did do it." I have absolutely no doubt that Goodell, Kensil et al would do that in an instant. No chance the real numbers are released if they vindicate Brady and the Pats. NONE.

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

I really need to stop reading this stuff because every time I do I feel the inner tempest redlining over the theft of a first round draft pick. It's one of if not the most unjust thing I can recall in sports.

Set-up>
>incompetence
>evidence to innocence
>disinformation campaign
>disregard of said evidence
>1st rounder because f-you we can
>Kraft goatse'ing to his puppet thereby defeating the entire purpose of installing a puppet
>continuation of proof that this entire thing was orchestrated by Grigson.

This entire thing is completely insane and will impact the Pats for the next five years.

...And don't forget the million dollars they stole from us...that Kraft stole from the military...who stole it from the tax payers...

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Here's the Prof. Leonard's slideshow

http://people.csail.mit.edu/jleonard/20150926_deflategate_for_2.05_thermo.pdf

 

[Seacoast Fan]

I have yet to hear any rational legal explanation for the Patriots not allowing additional interviews. None of the explanations the Patriots gave in press releases made any sense.

The Patriots claimed that Wells interviewed the equipment managers enough, and that it would be inconvenient to the equipment managers to be re-interviewed. But legally, neither reason makes any sense. The Patriots lawyers are supposed to be representing the Patriots as a corporate legal entity. The convenience of particular Patriots employees is not something the lawyers should - or even ethically can - consider. The Patriots lawyers must only consider one client: the Patriots corporation. That corporation is a legal entity distinct from any employee. So they have no reason to be concerned about some equipment manager's wasted time.

I have yet to hear any explanation for why the Patriots attorneys felt that allowing more interviews would have hurt the corporate entity called the Patriots.

And the argument that the interview is unnecessary is likewise absurd. All the interviews were unnecessary. As soon as the facts about the gas law and the lack of accurate records became clear, the investigation should have ended. The Patriots knew at that point the investigation was just a way for Well's firm to increase billings (and help a client), and for the NFL to save face. So arguing mid-process that the whole thing is a sham doesn't make sense: yes, it's a sham, but that is no reason not to play along.

And, knowing that Wells makes money from billing, why would they antagonize him by denying him more billing? Figuring Wells has four attorneys there plus likely paralegals, and the interview would have to be notated and analyzed, that decision likely cost Wells firm $50K in billings, maybe more if more interviews would be needed.

You are so wrong I don't even know where to begin. I hope to god you're not an attorney with corporate clients.

 

[Ivan]

I thought the professor was supposed to extend professional courtesy to Exponent and tell the class what aa swell lab they are and how professionally they conduct themselves. Critique is simply bad form.

 

[Rhodey]

Who gives a f### anymore? This is nice, scientific empirical information. But, it's nothing really new, just a reaffirmation of what other scientific analyses have told us already. The problem is that the mouth-breathing truthers who believe Brady CHEATED!!! are too dumb to be convinced by science and/or too blinded by hatred and jealousy to listen to reason. Understand: these are largely midwestern and southern hillbillies whose parents are likely brothers and sisters. Trying to convince them is a fool's errand.

Personally, I'm unwilling to begin conversations on topic at the foot of an open door; one that those who are simply envious of success based on hard work and preparation adopt. The team may have moved on, but many of their supporters have not to the degree that their detractor have not. And these sorts want to build on this situation; fling anything they can imagine on top. Nah, we're going to yank the foundation, as our team continues to prepare/execute and win. Because we choose to...

 

[The Boston Patriot]

Empirical is not science. The IGL is. What part of this entire slide show is empirical except for the information provided by the sting team? The sting team decided that their ignorance is beyond refute and when confronted by science they chose to ignore it. They got people to tell them what they wanted and ran with it, no more, no less.

"Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely". - John Dalberg-Acton

 

[BradyFTW!]

Isn't it about time for someone with an impeccable reputation to come out with an expose, filled with facts and blow this thing up already??

It has to be sensational enough to grab the attention of the same idiots that felt compelled to label the Patriots as the diabolical cheating deflators in the first place.

We live in a county where certain issues remain politically divisive, hard-fought topics despite there being near scientific consensus on one side of the issue. So no matter how flawless this someone's reputation is, and no matter how fact-drive and undeniable their expose is, I feel pretty comfortable asserting that people who don't like the conclusion will generally dispute it anyway. Because their ignorance is just as valid as your well-researched, thoroughly documented truth somehow. As long as they can find the occasional bad actor that's explicitly been paid to reach the conclusion they want to hear (Exponent), that will trump scientific consensus.

 

[NashuaPats]

We live in a county where certain issues remain politically divisive, hard-fought topics despite there being near scientific consensus on one side of the issue. So no matter how flawless this someone's reputation is, and no matter how fact-drive and undeniable their expose is, I feel pretty comfortable asserting that people who don't like the conclusion will generally dispute it anyway. Because their ignorance is just as valid as your well-researched, thoroughly documented truth somehow. As long as they can find the occasional bad actor that's explicitly been paid to reach the conclusion they want to hear (Exponent), that will trump scientific consensus.

But we're not talking about something complicated like climate change. The science involved here could be solved by high school students. That's what makes this so frustrating. The problem is the media has not explained it properly. Maybe it's because they are too afraid to cross the NFL, maybe they were to lazy to read the 250 page report, or maybe because even grade school science is over their heads. Very few fans outside of NE have bothered reading the whole report and seeing what a sham it is nor are they following the story close enough to read explanations from people like John Leonard, Steve McCintyre among others. Instead they are influenced by a corrupt league and an incompetent media. It's so damn frustrating.

 

[BradyFTW!]

But we're not talking about something complicated like climate change. The science involved here could be solved by high school students. That's what makes this so frustrating. The problem is the media has not explained it properly. Maybe it's because they are too afraid to cross the NFL, maybe they were to lazy to read the 250 page report, or maybe because even grade school science is over their heads. Very few fans outside of NE have bothered reading the whole report and seeing what a sham it is nor are they following the story close enough to read explanations from people like John Leonard, Steve McCintyre among others. Instead they are influenced by a corrupt league and an incompetent media. It's so damn frustrating.

That's been the case since day one, and it hasn't changed anything. For the average person, even high school science is intimidating to the point that they just won't do it. Add in the politicization of the issue, and no matter how simple the underlying science is you're going to get exactly what we have with climate change: people who believe what they want to believe, and cling to a few 'scientific' sources who are acting in bad faith against the overwhelming consensus to justify their beliefs. We've seen it happen many times before, I can't think of a good reason why it would be different here when so many people want a reason to discredit the Pats so badly that they're fine with inventing some.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

We live in a county where certain issues remain politically divisive, hard-fought topics despite there being near scientific consensus on one side of the issue. So no matter how flawless this someone's reputation is, and no matter how fact-drive and undeniable their expose is, I feel pretty comfortable asserting that people who don't like the conclusion will generally dispute it anyway. Because their ignorance is just as valid as your well-researched, thoroughly documented truth somehow. As long as they can find the occasional bad actor that's explicitly been paid to reach the conclusion they want to hear (Exponent), that will trump scientific consensus.

Great post. We have a society thick with people who fit the unwavering category of: 'my feeling is a fact'. Media celebrates it, politicians feed off of it, individuals/entities use it.

It is the single biggest failing of our society, IMHO, that is more responsible for bad decisions (even more than just plain ignorance).

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

We live in a county where certain issues remain politically divisive, hard-fought topics despite there being near scientific consensus on one side of the issue. So no matter how flawless this someone's reputation is, and no matter how fact-drive and undeniable their expose is, I feel pretty comfortable asserting that people who don't like the conclusion will generally dispute it anyway. Because their ignorance is just as valid as your well-researched, thoroughly documented truth somehow. As long as they can find the occasional bad actor that's explicitly been paid to reach the conclusion they want to hear (Exponent), that will trump scientific consensus.

Science is not about consensus.
For an example, look at who McCann cites in his bibliography.

 

[Oswlek]

I have yet to hear any rational legal explanation for the Patriots not allowing additional interviews. None of the explanations the Patriots gave in press releases made any sense.

The NFL and Patriots agreed to 1 interview per person. IIRC the eq guys were interviewed 5 times, finally the Patriots said enough is enough.

This. The NFL and the Patriots had a prearranged agreement that each party can be only be interviewed once barring unforeseen circumstances. Incompetence by the interviewing party does not meet this criterion.

Those that want to believe that the Patriots refused the interview because they had something to hide are free to do so, but NE was within their rights even according to the NFL's own guidelines.

 

[Deus Irae]

We live in a county where certain issues remain politically divisive, hard-fought topics despite there being near scientific consensus on one side of the issue. So no matter how flawless this someone's reputation is, and no matter how fact-drive and undeniable their expose is, I feel pretty comfortable asserting that people who don't like the conclusion will generally dispute it anyway. Because their ignorance is just as valid as your well-researched, thoroughly documented truth somehow. As long as they can find the occasional bad actor that's explicitly been paid to reach the conclusion they want to hear (Exponent), that will trump scientific consensus.

Science has been politicized. Outside of basic formulae, pretty much everything is suspect. And certain issues are great examples of the science being deliberately tampered with in order to try scaring the populace with a bunch of lies and nonsense.

And, as PWP notes, consensus is not science and science is not consensus.

 

[Galeb]

I have yet to hear any rational legal explanation for the Patriots not allowing additional interviews. None of the explanations the Patriots gave in press releases made any sense.

The Patriots claimed that Wells interviewed the equipment managers enough, and that it would be inconvenient to the equipment managers to be re-interviewed. But legally, neither reason makes any sense. The Patriots lawyers are supposed to be representing the Patriots as a corporate legal entity. The convenience of particular Patriots employees is not something the lawyers should - or even ethically can - consider. The Patriots lawyers must only consider one client: the Patriots corporation. That corporation is a legal entity distinct from any employee. So they have no reason to be concerned about some equipment manager's wasted time.

I have yet to hear any explanation for why the Patriots attorneys felt that allowing more interviews would have hurt the corporate entity called the Patriots.

And the argument that the interview is unnecessary is likewise absurd. All the interviews were unnecessary. As soon as the facts about the gas law and the lack of accurate records became clear, the investigation should have ended. The Patriots knew at that point the investigation was just a way for Well's firm to increase billings (and help a client), and for the NFL to save face. So arguing mid-process that the whole thing is a sham doesn't make sense: yes, it's a sham, but that is no reason not to play along.

And, knowing that Wells makes money from billing, why would they antagonize him by denying him more billing? Figuring Wells has four attorneys there plus likely paralegals, and the interview would have to be notated and analyzed, that decision likely cost Wells firm $50K in billings, maybe more if more interviews would be needed.

The Patriots signed an agreement with Wells that they would make everyone available once. By the time Wells had asked for more interviews, the NFL had already denied the Pats request to correct Mortensen's false claims. When someone is effing with you, you no longer go above and beyond for them than what is required.

Oh yeah, and there's this.

 

[NashuaPats]

That's been the case since day one, and it hasn't changed anything. For the average person, even high school science is intimidating to the point that they just won't do it. Add in the politicization of the issue, and no matter how simple the underlying science is you're going to get exactly what we have with climate change: people who believe what they want to believe, and cling to a few 'scientific' sources who are acting in bad faith against the overwhelming consensus to justify their beliefs. We've seen it happen many times before, I can't think of a good reason why it would be different here when so many people want a reason to discredit the Pats so badly that they're fine with inventing some.

I still disagree with it being an issue of general ignorance and the climate change comparison. Outside of passionate Patriots fans, not many know the facts. I'll give you a couple of examples.

Back in August, my dad who is a Patriots fan but doesn't spend time reading about these things, mentioned to me that they were probably guilty. Of course, I jumped all over that and explained the facts to him and changed his mind. He was unaware that there were even two gauges.

Just last week, the subject came up when I was visiting with my sister. She's not a football fan, but lives in NH and likes to see the Pats do well. She also assumed the Patriots were likely guilty. She is a biochemist with an Ivy league degree. She saw the original reports as it was carried by the regular media rather than just the sports pages. She knew a science consulting firm stated evidence that showed the balls were most likely tampered with and that was the extent of her knowledge on that. Just like with my dad, I explained the scientific facts to her. It was the first she had heard of it.

Both my dad and my sister were victims of the slide Professor Leonard showed about the effect of an erroneous initial report. Had the media addressed Exponent's errors and statements by the many reputable scientists and other scholars, they would have known the truth of the matter. But that has not happened. It would make a great story to show the level of the NFL's corruption. Why that hasn't happened, I don't know. Maybe they don't want to cross the NFL who has some level of partnership with much of the media. Maybe they don't find it as interesting as we devoted Patriots fans. Like I said, it's not that people are ignorant of science in general. The science involved here is basic stuff, but unless you read Patsfans or other Patriots news, you likely do not know the basic facts.

 

[363839]

Isn't it about time for someone with an impeccable reputation to come out with an expose, filled with facts and blow this thing up already??

It has to be sensational enough to grab the attention of the same idiots that felt compelled to label the Patriots as the diabolical cheating deflators in the first place.

This has already happened but the only reaction from the haters is...Oh they were paid to say that.
Just can't win with a hater.

 

[jpat]

This. The NFL and the Patriots had a prearranged agreement that each party can be only be interviewed once barring unforeseen circumstances. Incompetence by the interviewing party does not meet this criterion.

Those that want to believe that the Patriots refused the interview because they had something to hide are free to do so, but NE was within their rights even according to the NFL's own guidelines.

To add to this a bit, according to the wellsreportcontext, they didn't deny them the interview, they asked Wells why they requested another interview, and asked if it could be done over the phone. The spin is the patriots "refused it", when in reality they simply said, "why do you want him again?"

Thus, when subsequently asked for what would have been a fifth interview of Mr. McNally, Patriots counsel wanted to understand what unanticipated circumstances warranted this, including whether the interview would be limited to matters that were simply not available to the investigators during Mr. McNally’s prior interview. The Patriots advised the investigators of their reluctance to have Mr. McNally back yet again, particularly given the media harassment he and his family had suffered as a result of prior leaks of Mr. McNally’s name and hometown. The distress to him and his family caused by the ensuing media attention was described in detail to the investigators. With this background, there was a high hurdle before the Patriots would ask Mr. McNally to appear yet again for what would be his fifth interview, and a particular desire to be sure that the standard for another interview — unanticipated circumstances — was met...
....Although receiving no assurances that the requested additional Mr. McNally interview would satisfy the agreed-upon interview protocol, Patriots counsel nonetheless suggested that there might be ways other than another in-person interview to get whatever further information was sought. Patriots counsel offered to be of assistance in those respects. There was no follow-up from the investigators.

from wellsreportcontext.com

 

[RunAmok]

To add to this a bit, according to the wellsreportcontext, they didn't deny them the interview, they asked Wells why they requested another interview, and asked if it could be done over the phone. The spin is the patriots "refused it", when in reality they simply said, "why do you want him again?"



from wellsreportcontext.com

And - look at the wells report. 5 interviews and not one quote shows up in the report!! Or when TB was told that his phone was not needed and then it was used against him when he did not supply it later. This was a bag job and the Pats lawyer's were smart not to keep the charade going.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

I still harbor the following hopes:

1. That after his next Super Bowl victory, Brady goes on 60 Minutes and presents his side, complete with a description of how the League refused to correct the erroneous early measurements. If Brady can be coached to handle the most complex offense in the history of football, he can be coached to logically and clearly present how he and the Patriots were railroaded.

2. If the League doesn't produce the PSI numbers at halftime at some cold games, then one of the local Boston TV stations does their own public experiment that can then also be replayed on the above 60 Minutes show

3. At some point someone from within 345 Park Avenue spills the beans about what actually went down. Might take a year or two before someone leaves in disgust and tells all.