More from PFT " (Holy crap, I think I’m beginning to agree with Don Yee.) "

[Deus Irae]

Brady said he considered JJ a friend but couldn't recall MCnallys name I believe. Wasn't aware he said he didn't know them.

From the report, page 76 (The report may have a different notation elsewhere):

He claimed that
prior to the events surrounding the AFC Championship Game, he did not know McNally‟s name
or anything about McNally‟s game-day responsibilities, including whether McNally had any role
relating to game balls or the game officials.

Brady's not denying knowing Jastremski, and he's not denying knowing McNally. He's denying knowing McNally's name, which is, potentially, a big difference.

 

[Ian]

I'm looking at it for a different reason. I'm looking at it from the McNally "stress" angle.

Brady said he considered JJ a friend but couldn't recall MCnallys name I believe. Wasn't aware he said he didn't know them.

From the report: "He claimed that prior to the events surrounding the AFC Championship Game, he did not know McNally‟s name or anything about McNally‟s game-day responsibilities, including whether McNally had any role relating to game balls or the game officials. We found these claims not plausible and contradicted by other evidence."

That's what they're using against him. I wasn't aware McNally had a nickname, so you're right, that could be something Brady uses in his defense when the time comes.

EDIT: Deus posted the exact same thing above, right as I was grabbing it

 

[ViperGTS]

One of Jastremski's text was him saying how Brady told him to bring the rule of 12.5-13.5 to the refs, right?

Hard to imagine Brady would have directed them to deflate it under regulation if he is having guys bring the PSI level rule to the refs.

Why is this so hard for people to figure out? How does I want to ensure the rules turn into your are guilty?

 

[patsfanincleveland]

From the report: "He claimed that prior to the events surrounding the AFC Championship Game, he did not know McNally‟s name or anything about McNally‟s game-day responsibilities, including whether McNally had any role relating to game balls or the game officials. We found these claims not plausible and contradicted by other evidence."

That's what they're using against him. I wasn't aware McNally had a nickname, so you're right, that could be something Brady uses in his defense when the time comes.

EDIT: Deus posted the exact same thing above, right as I was grabbing it

Tedy mentioned this.

He is known as Bird.

 

[TheBeers]

Hmmm sure would be nice to read a transcript of the interviews of McNally, Jastremski, and of course Brady!

 

[SVN]

One of Jastremski's text was him saying how Brady told him to bring the rule of 12.5-13.5 to the refs, right?

Hard to imagine Brady would have directed them to deflate it under regulation if he is having guys bring the PSI level rule to the refs.

Volin has an awesome explanation for this

Ben Volin ‏@BenVolin 31m31 minutes ago
The 16 PSI thing was only hearsay, not substantiated https://twitter.com/GraceZoeZachDad/status/597580315943567360…

You can get after him in twitter if you care

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Because the argument they're trying to make - which is valid but I don't think fits the definition of wrongdoing - is that Brady was pestering these guys about making sure the psi was at the lower threshold, which means he obviously knew what they were doing. However, I don't think, and most sensible people seem to agree, that Brady ever wanted them to break the rules and under-inflate them below the league's requirement. But the fact that during Brady's interview in the report he claimed to not even know these guys, which was clearly not true, is the thing most people keep coming back to as what they believe is going to be the issue.

Ian, did Brady claim to not know both equipment guys? I thought he claimed to not know equipment guy1 but knew equipment guy2?

(1) Brady's responses to knowing or not knowing one or both equipment guys is from the Wells' report. Consider that we also know the Wells report manipulated testimony to draw a conclusion (for example he dismisses the head ref when it helps to prove his claim, dismisses him when it helps to prove his claim). Unless we have context surrounding Brady's statements as well as the full verbatim statements themselves, why aren't his statements also being manipulated?
(2)It would be a bit shocking to me if Brady stated on the record "I don't know and never have heard of either of these two equipment guys" considering that (i) it wouldn't be too difficult to prove he did, (ii) knowing one or both equipment guys is proof of absolutely nothing, (iii) he had weeks to prepare for the interview and had counsel with him in the room.

If Brady in fact denied any knowledge whatsoever of the existence of one or both equipment guys, and in fact he did interact with them enough to know who they are and what they do, he has opened himself up to the possibility of justifiable league punishment. Further, if there is actual proof one or both of the equipment guys knowingly deflated footballs in an illegal manner and to an illegal degree, and Brady willfully lied about knowing one or both of them, that is certainly a piece of circumstantial evidence that makes me suspicious (the only one).

 

[SVN]

From the report: "He claimed that prior to the events surrounding the AFC Championship Game, he did not know McNally‟s name or anything about McNally‟s game-day responsibilities, including whether McNally had any role relating to game balls or the game officials. We found these claims not plausible and contradicted by other evidence."

That's what they're using against him. I wasn't aware McNally had a nickname, so you're right, that could be something Brady uses in his defense when the time comes.

EDIT: Deus posted the exact same thing above, right as I was grabbing it

So Brady doesnt know McNally and didnt hand over his phone .So this was all the 5 hr questioning he was subjected to ??

 

[ViperGTS]

Volin has an awesome explanation for this

Ben Volin ‏@BenVolin 31m31 minutes ago
The 16 PSI thing was only hearsay, not substantiated https://twitter.com/GraceZoeZachDad/status/597580315943567360…

You can get after him in twitter if you care

So is half the report! Are you kidding me?! How can this be let to pass? What exactly is going on here?

 

[JMC00]

Why is this so hard for people to figure out? How does I want to ensure the rules turn into your are guilty?

People just saw the headline of the report and thats all they need and nothing will change it because of their hatred for the Patriots and Brady

As for Wells disregarding it well that's because the NFL paid him to.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Nobody, outside of New England cares anymore. Brady is guilty, the Patriots are cheaters, suspend Brady, take away draft choices and fine them -- that is how ESPN and mediot haters have portrayed things.

The mediot haters have already ruled and Goodell will follow national sentiment.

It has been a bag job since the scheme was concocted and it played out exactly how patriot hating teams hoped it might.

We're screwed - maybe, if Brady chooses to fight, suspensions will be over turned, but, public sentiment won't.

After years of trying to explain spy gate truth to people that have no clue, this simply compounds the cheatriot notion. I can't imagine more defense from me. I will simply tell them one time, wrong, gets the facts right and you hate us cuz you ain't us. That's all I got left in me.

Not sure there is anything else we, as Patriot fanatics, can do.

Enjoy the four rings and hopefully a couple more and screw 'em all after that.

I am certainly open to some kind of message we can all send....maybe, somebody will figure out a way that we can collectively respond.

Granted this is anecdotal, however, I think you could have stopped at "nobody outside of New England cares". I'm a well known die hard Patriots fan among friends and coworkers (and most of these people I know don't reside in New England). Except for die hard NFL fans what I'm hearing, seeing, reading is apathy and/or indifference. I'm just not finding this story to be generating much interest.
Granted the gut reaction to what little thought it is getting is "cheater". But from here out I think this story is largely an NFL diehard fan thing(with the caveat that media inculcation could change that).

 

[karguy85]

This is what makes me feel the worst about this whole situation. Mike Reiss put it well:

ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter tweeted something Saturday morning that resonated with me; it was advice on journalism and social media from Margaret Sullivan, public editor of the New York Times. Three points I highlighted were: Think more about fairness than objectivity; think about how close you can get to the truth; put yourself in the place of the people who will be affected by your work (that doesn't mean to pull your punches). I think those can apply in more areas than journalism, and in fact, they are three reasons that highlight why I think commissioner Roger Goodell has erred badly from the start with the league's handling of the Patriots and underinflated footballs, making this into a much bigger deal than it is. Over the last three days, I've digested the 243-page Wells report reading it multiple times, and with its bias and lack of fairness in certain areas, I truly can't believe what the commissioner has done to the legacy and reputation of one of the greatest quarterbacks and ambassadors in the history of the game -- all over air pressure in a football and without definitive proof he had anything to do with it.

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england...781318/quick-hit-thoughts-around-the-patriots

 

[50-yard-line]

Nothing I said was political, and don't tell me what not to post when I post comparisons, just because you happen to see what looks to you like a political component at first reading.

Bull! the 18th Century Scots considered the Jacobites very politic...oh never mind...

(ps. If you're not watching Outlander, you should be.)

 

[SVN]

Now peter king starting to steal some thoughts from elsewhere

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing 9m9 minutes ago
<<If teams have ballboys at home+Brady asked ballboys to doctor balls’ inflation levels, that could happen at home. Couldn’t happen on road.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing 8m8 minutes ago
Brady may not be telling truth. I do not know if he is or not. I am just telling you there is reason to doubt some of Wells report.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing 7m7 minutes ago
I have doubts like many of you. The text messages bother me a lot. Sometimes, reading Wells Report, I feel like Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing 2m2 minutes ago
Peter King retweeted JimmyD

Read my Stat of the Week tomorrow. Walt Anderson blew it, and he blew it big time.
Peter King @SI_PeterKing · 21m21 minutes ago
Peter King retweeted Tim Ring

I don’t know if he cheated or not. I know I read the Wells Report and had some questions.

Peter King @SI_PeterKing · 33m33 minutes ago
Brady TD passes since 2006: Home: 131 in 65 games. Road: 138 in 64 games.
— Wasn’t he supposed to have the balls fixed for him at home?

Peter KingVerified account‏@SI_PeterKing
Peter King retweeted Tim Hourihan

If I had a strong one, I’d give it to you. The fact is, I do not know if Brady cheated.

 

[ViperGTS]

This is what makes me feel the worst about this whole situation. Mike Reiss put it well:



http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england...781318/quick-hit-thoughts-around-the-patriots

Put Shefter, Howe, Reiss and possibly Currans DNA into a machine and make a SHRC baby. Male or female it would be the quintessential level headed fair media repoter ever seen!

 

[BelichickFan]

I'm no fan of Peter King - at all - but he's an influential media guy, for him to be more on our side than not is a good thing.

 

[SVN]

I'm no fan of Peter King - at all - but he's an influential media guy, for him to be more on our side than not is a good thing.

Thats his problem. He is on no one's side and everyone's side. He says this too.
gtfo‏@gtfo
@SI_PeterKing you usually do an interview with brady before his best buddies charity event… is that happening again this year?
Peter King @SI_PeterKing · 36m36 minutes ago
Peter King retweeted gtfo
I hope so. I have requested it.

This is all he cares. Access everywhere for his columns.

 

[Fencer]

I'm proud to be associated with everyone in here and we've got a great group and a lot of great football minds on this board. Every once in a while I'll see something one of you has said end up being mentioned elsewhere, and the folks at WEEI seem to also mention the board in a pretty positive light, which is definitely a good thing and all of you deserve the credit for that for what everyone brings day-in, and day out in here. Good stuff

I only recall one thing I ever posted here that made it into the press -- I coined the term "Gronkle".

Separately, under my real name I've tweeted with some of the reporters, notably Reiss, but that's usually just for typos and clarifications.

 

[karguy85]

Tide seems to be turning somewhat. Let's see what the new week brings.

 

[BradyBranch39]

Florio just wrote another pretty good one. Perhaps better than his last one. The media's finally starting to think logically.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...deal-its-too-late-for-the-nfl-to-say-it-isnt/