No, it almost certainly would not thrown out because of those things.
Dealing with uncertainties, unwritten things, contradictory testimoney, etc. are what courts do all the time.
For example, with respect to pre-game readings, the NFL would put Anderson on the stand and he would testify under oath that the readings were what he told Wells they they were. The Brady or NE lawyers would hit him with questions to try to show that his memory was faulty, or the nature of the process was such that it wasn't reasonable for him to be able to remember, etc., etc.
Then it would be up to the finder of fact (judge in a bench trial, jury in a jury trial) to decide for itself how much credibility to assign to what Anderson said. If they believe him it matters not a whit that he didn't write down pre-game readings.
And similar things would happen for all the contested things you mentioned.