AFC Championship time....

[linesiders]

FWIW - some of the info which has been circulating in these parts for days since the Wells reported was released.

http://nesn.com/2015/05/five-biggest...-wells-report/

Highlights:

— PSI wasn’t recorded before the AFC Championship Game
— Two pressure gauges used were wildly off
— Colts footballs were tested after Patriots footballs
— Text messages were dated months before AFC Championship Game
— Texts never state Tom Brady wanted his footballs under 12.5 PSI

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by 77T

I guess that's true. I don't know the appeals process very well. Is there any hazard of steeper penalties if your appeal isn't well-founded? I mean could it reopen the investigation and require TB to share those PMs & EMs.?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just watched a report that said that an appeal would go to an arbitrator, out of the hands of the NFL, and that in the recent past some penalties have been reduced.


http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...lans-to-appeal

[warrior]

Even if you take the Wells report as gospel....suspending a player for "probably" being "generally aware" of the inappropriate activities of others is ridiculous. IMO, punishment from a moral and ethical perspective should require that player to be an active participant ( somehow encouraging or dictating) in the alleged scheme. If Wells had wanted and had enough evidence, he could have said Brady was probably involved in the alleged scheme. He didn't.

[HL65]

Looks like the Pats signed a new QB to step in for Brady while he is suspended and supposedly he is pretty good.

image.jpg

[linesiders]

Dom Grady, #13

Looks more like a castmember from Anchorman?

[77T]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I just watched a report that said that an appeal would go to an arbitrator, out of the hands of the NFL, and that in the recent past some penalties have been reduced.


http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...lans-to-appeal

Good deal - I guess we'll see if uncooperative behavior is 4 games' worthy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gaijin]

Originally Posted by warrior

Even if you take the Wells report as gospel....suspending a player for "probably" being "generally aware" of the inappropriate activities of others is ridiculous. IMO, punishment from a moral and ethical perspective should require that player to be an active participant ( somehow encouraging or dictating) in the alleged scheme. If Wells had wanted and had enough evidence, he could have said Brady was probably involved in the alleged scheme. He didn't.

Any Pats fans who still think that the suspension was based on the deflation issues?

Tom Brady was suspended because he failed to cooperate with the investigation. He gave a big middle finger to Rodger Goodell. This is not a court of law. He does not have the right to remain silent or lawyer up. Sure he has the right I guess to not cooperate, but make no mistake this is why he got hammered. His ego against Goodell's.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by warrior

Even if you take the Wells report as gospel....suspending a player for "probably" being "generally aware" of the inappropriate activities of others is ridiculous. IMO, punishment from a moral and ethical perspective should require that player to be an active participant ( somehow encouraging or dictating) in the alleged scheme. If Wells had wanted and had enough evidence, he could have said Brady was probably involved in the alleged scheme. He didn't.

You are not taking into consideration the burden of proof in the investigation pursuant to NFL rules.

You would do well to read this article and listen to the conference call between Wells and the media. Your concerns are addressed in these data.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/20...OYL/story.html

[warrior]

Im well aware of the burden of proof. And, based on the circumstantial evidence, Mr. Wells himself proved my point...that's precisely why he could only suggest "probably...generally aware." I most likely read those articles before you. It's not common public knowledge--no matter what Ted Wells says, investigators, especially if they've spent over 3 and 1/2 months on an investigation and used 5 million dollars in resources, want to find violations. It's embarassing otherwise. Like it or not, that's the nature of the beast. As such, they will slant the report ( as much as "legally" possible), to find violations. I sense the stretching in reviewing the circumstantial evidence and hedging language.

As for Brady's disclosure ( as well as the overall punishment), I like this article...if you can't access, Id google "Frank Schwab....5 top reasons punishment." And yes, I'm a Pats fan ;-). I'm not saying Brady is not responsible...I'd like to see more evidence.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...233900364.html


QUOTE=GradyPhilpott;5837655]You are not taking into consideration the burden of proof in the investigation pursuant to NFL rules.

You would do well to read this article and listen to the conference call between Wells and the media. Your concerns are addressed in these data.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/20...OYL/story.html[/QUOTE]

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by warrior

Im well aware of the burden of proof. And, based on the circumstantial evidence, Mr. Wells himself proved my point...that's precisely why he could only suggest "probably...generally aware." I most likely read those articles before you. It's not common public knowledge--no matter what Ted Wells says, investigators, especially if they've spent over 3 and 1/2 months on an investigation and used 5 million dollars in resources, want to find violations. It's embarassing otherwise. Like it or not, that's the nature of the beast. As such, they will slant the report ( as much as "legally" possible), to find violations. I sense the stretching in reviewing the circumstantial evidence and hedging language.

As for Brady's disclosure ( as well as the overall punishment), I like this article...if you can't access, Id google "Frank Schwab....5 top reasons punishment." And yes, I'm a Pats fan ;-). I'm not saying Brady is not responsible...I'd like to see more evidence.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...233900364.html

Based on your response, I can only conclude that you did not listen to or read Mr. Wells response to the criticism of his report.

You have simply chosen an article that comports with your own view and have chosen to agree with that article rather than make a conclusion of your own based on Mr. Wells' (the investigator) statements.

That's your right.

[warrior]

Well...since I do civil and criminal investigations for a living ( and I'm not saying I'm like him) and can read, I guess I have the right to my opinion. [QUOTE=GradyPhilpott;5837794]

Originally Posted by warrior

Im well aware of the burden of proof. And, based on the circumstantial evidence, Mr. Wells himself proved my point...that's precisely why he could only suggest "probably...generally aware." I most likely read those articles before you. It's not common public knowledge--no matter what Ted Wells says, investigators, especially if they've spent over 3 and 1/2 months on an investigation and used 5 million dollars in resources, want to find violations. It's embarassing otherwise. Like it or not, that's the nature of the beast. As such, they will slant the report ( as much as "legally" possible), to find violations. I sense the stretching in reviewing the circumstantial evidence and hedging language.

As for Brady's disclosure ( as well as the overall punishment), I like this article...if you can't access, Id google "Frank Schwab....5 top reasons punishment." And yes, I'm a Pats fan ;-). I'm not saying Brady is not responsible...I'd like to see more evidence.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...233900364.html


Based on your response, I can only conclude that you did not listen to or read Mr. Wells response to the criticism of his report.

You have simply chosen an article that comports with your own view and have chosen to agree with that article rather than make a conclusion of your own based on Mr. Wells' (the investigator) statements.

That's your right.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by Gaijin

Any Pats fans who still think that the suspension was based on the deflation issues?

Tom Brady was suspended because he failed to cooperate with the investigation. He gave a big middle finger to Rodger Goodell. This is not a court of law. He does not have the right to remain silent or lawyer up. Sure he has the right I guess to not cooperate, but make no mistake this is why he got hammered. His ego against Goodell's.

Spot on tom! This is the nfl not Burger King.