Brady has hired Jeffrey Kessler as per Schefter

Deflating balls to the pressure you like them at (within league guidlines) isn't cheating. Its only cheating if you do it after the refs inspection. I really don't understand why the guy who is supposed to get the balls the way Tom likes them referring to himself as the Deflator is damning. Isn't deflating the balls to Tom's liking a big part of his job? The burden of proof should be that he did it after the inspection. And when you look at the psi data as reported by Anderson (using the logo gauge) they not only have nothing, they have pretty good proof that nothing at all illegal happened.

PlainOldEd said:

Deflating balls to the pressure you like them at (within league guidlines) isn't cheating. Its only cheating if you do it after the refs inspection. I really don't understand why the guy who is supposed to get the balls the way Tom likes them referring to himself as the Deflator is damning. Isn't deflating the balls to Tom's liking a big part of his job? The burden of proof should be that he did it after the inspection. And when you look at the psi data as reported by Anderson (using the logo gauge) they not only have nothing, they have pretty good proof that nothing at all illegal happened.

Click to expand...

the burden of proof in this case is "more probable than not" which is much less than "bullet proof." as many alluded to months ago, this enables goodell to nail brady and the pats without much proof. also mcnally said "I"m not going to ESPN, yet."

Ted Wells' conclusion was: Text Messages + Failure to Cooperate + Deflated Footballs = more probable than not.

My main issue is whether the footballs were deflated in the first place (outside of physics). The Ref can't remember which guage he used to measure the balls pre-game. This is huge.

When I heard that he retained Kessler to represent him (or the NFLPA did) I kept thinking of this scene from Pulp Fiction.......Language is NSFW

TommyBrady12 said:

the burden of proof in this case is "more probable than not" which is much less than "bullet proof." as many alluded to months ago, this enables goodell to nail brady and the pats without much proof. also mcnally said "I"m not going to ESPN, yet."

Ted Wells' conclusion was: Text Messages + Failure to Cooperate + Deflated Footballs = more probable than not.

My main issue is whether the footballs were deflated in the first place (outside of physics). The Ref can't remember which guage he used to measure the balls pre-game. This is huge.

Click to expand...

There is NO evidence that the balls were deflated.
SHOULD be Game Over.

TommyBrady12 said:

the burden of proof in this case is "more probable than not" which is much less than "bullet proof." as many alluded to months ago, this enables goodell to nail brady and the pats without much proof. also mcnally said "I"m not going to ESPN, yet."

Ted Wells' conclusion was: Text Messages + Failure to Cooperate + Deflated Footballs = more probable than not.

My main issue is whether the footballs were deflated in the first place (outside of physics). The Ref can't remember which guage he used to measure the balls pre-game. This is huge.

Click to expand...

but in this case the "more probable than not" determination was made by the prosecutor who will always find that to be the case. Wells didn't just investigate, he prosecuted and handed down judgement while disallowing any defense. I believe this is the strength of Bradys (and even Krafts) appeal. Stalin would be pleased.

Good article about this and the options in the Globe this morning

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...cM/story.html?p1=Article_InThisSection_Bottom

For all those ra-ra 'Brady going nuclear' posters from yesterday, suggest you read - options are limited and suing for defamation requires a high burden of proof

JoeShmoe said:

suing for defamation requires a high burden of proof

Click to expand...

Maybe so but Malicious use of process and a breach of the antitrust exemption are both very valid options, should he want to go down the lawsuit route.

Big-T said:

Maybe so but Malicious use of process and a breach of the antitrust exemption are both very valid options, should he want to go down the lawsuit route.

Click to expand...

In which case, this article isn't very good, because it missed that option.

TommyBrady12 said:

Ted Wells' conclusion was: Text Messages + Failure to Cooperate + Deflated Footballs = more probable than not.

Click to expand...

Wells actually thought more than that. In his press conference yesterday he pretty much said he believed NE was doing it all season, not just in the AFCCG.

QuantumMechanic said:

Wells actually thought more than that. In his press conference yesterday he pretty much said he believed NE was doing it all season, not just in the AFCCG.

Click to expand...

Assuming and knowing are two different things.

JoeShmoe said:

Good article about this and the options in the Globe this morning

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...cM/story.html?p1=Article_InThisSection_Bottom

For all those ra-ra 'Brady going nuclear' posters from yesterday, suggest you read - options are limited and suing for defamation requires a high burden of proof

Click to expand...

All he needs is to lose a endorsement. If I'm Brady I would call some favors on this regard.

PatsWickedPissah said:

There is NO evidence that the balls were deflated.
SHOULD be Game Over.

Click to expand...

But yesterday Wells said he had 'direct evidence' of guilt against brady, citing the e-mails as the direct evidence. Sorry ted, even I know that is not direct evidence, nowhere does brady tell them to deflate the balls to below league min.

betterthanthealternative said:

In which case, this article isn't very good, because it missed that option.

Click to expand...

Just look at who wrote it and you'll realize why it isn't good and shouldn't even be taken into consideration because said writer is clueless.

JoeShmoe said:

Good article about this and the options in the Globe this morning

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...cM/story.html?p1=Article_InThisSection_Bottom

For all those ra-ra 'Brady going nuclear' posters from yesterday, suggest you read - options are limited and suing for defamation requires a high burden of proof

Click to expand...

Suits like this are sometimes done just for the discovery. Lets see what is on Goodell's and Kensil's personal phones too.

PatsWickedPissah said:

There is NO evidence that the balls were deflated.
SHOULD be Game Over.

Click to expand...

This is the key for me as well. They are punishing Brady because they think he may have known about something they can't even prove happened. That's as ridiculous as it gets, and it lowers the bar to a level that only Stalin would be comfortable with. Everyone is thrilled they are using it to f.ck the Patriots but they won't be when the circus comes to their town.

Sfpat said:

but in this case the "more probable than not" determination was made by the prosecutor who will always find that to be the case. Wells didn't just investigate, he prosecuted and handed down judgement while disallowing any defense. I believe this is the strength of Bradys (and even Krafts) appeal. Stalin would be pleased.

Click to expand...

Lmao, and I thought I was the first to bring Stalin into this.

Ivan said:

but they won't be when the circus comes to their town.

Click to expand...

But when the lights are turning 'round
And wheels are rolling on the ground
That day Brady will burn the NFL down
When the circus comes to town

JoeShmoe said:

Good article about this and the options in the Globe this morning

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...cM/story.html?p1=Article_InThisSection_Bottom

For all those ra-ra 'Brady going nuclear' posters from yesterday, suggest you read - options are limited and suing for defamation requires a high burden of proof

Click to expand...

Suing is a PR move also, and if your opponent is afraid of what discovery will put in the court of public opinion they will frequently concede. THe author sound like he is used to playing tic tac toe, instead of chess.

The presumption of hacks like Volin is that Brady ordered the Code Red, I don't believe he ever told anybody to taper with the balls after they were approved by the ref, especially if they were delivered to the refs @ 12.5 PSI as he specified to Jerwerski (sp?).

MUCH MORE downside to Kensil, Goodell, Wells et al from the discovery process. Something Volin ignores. The NFL at Park Ave understands this quite well even if nitwit sports reporters don't.

Ivan said:

This is the key for me as well. They are punishing Brady because they think he may have known about something they can't even prove happened. That's as ridiculous as it gets, and it lowers the bar to a level that only Stalin would be comfortable with. Everyone is thrilled they are using it to f.ck the Patriots but they won't be when the circus comes to their town.

Click to expand...

"We can't prove anything happened. These guys look like maybe they're talking about doing something that we don't know even happened, and you won't give us your phone, so we're gonna assume you knew about them maybe doing something that we don't know even happened. Guilty!"

Seriously, where in the world does this make sense? It's equivalent to saying that my neighbor's tree fell over, we don't know if there was any foul play but it appears that it simply fell on its own, but a guy I know once called himself a "pushover", he must be talking about pushing the tree over, and I didn't let my neighbor look at my texts so therefore I must be part of the tree-demolishing conspiracy.

My question is whether Bob Kraft is also assembling an elite team of lawyers?