There is no getting around dealing with this. The science part of the Wells report states they are not sure if anything even happened out of the ordinary. All the NFL actually had to hand a coat on was that one text. Patriots had to deal with it. The coat text is the only saving grace there.
No doubt...the conclusion of the Wells report can be boiled down to this:
1. Scientific evidence was inconclusive, the lower PSI's for the Pats lend credence to deflation but it's not conclusive (partly because Exponent spun it to their 'inconclusive' benefit, but I digress)
2. 'Deflator' text indicates McNally likely deflates footballs, with some supplemental texts used as support documentation
3. ‘…He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done…” text implicates Brady and suggests he had a
general awareness of the illegal activities in point #2.
Those, as the rebuttal stated, are the lynchpin arguments. They HAD TO provide context around those texts, especially where they're the main focus in all media reports.
I'm not gonna pretend they did themselves any favors (vis-a-vis the media) with their explanations but I think they're plausible. Further, I think they did a great job explaning the science and why it should be the main focus. If the science
most likely exonerates the Pats then
questionable text messages shouldn't condemn them...and I think that was the argument the Pats laid out.
In a court of law, with these guys taking the stand, with McNally's friend taking the stand about the tickets, this is a slam...friggin...dunk. And I think that's what was accomplished here: 'Goodell, here's what we have, we'll murder you in court. Work with us here or we sue...and oh by the way there's Blandino's lie, the media leaks, the sting...you don't want this in court'.