The Verdict Is In On Deflategate...

[Big RR]

I don't begrudge them the paycheck, but for many the thrill of the sport is just as important. Many engage in highly dangerous sports with little or no financial compensation; some even pay to do so.

[Crackpot]

And some do it with a baby strapped to thier back.

[Lord Jim]

If anyone cares to make the argument:

"Well okay, somebody on the Pats cheated, but look, they so dominated the game (for starters, 28 points in the second half, where there was no question about the balls) they would have won any way"...

I am perfectly prepared to stipulate that as true...(Of course if this had happened in the 24-23 Super Bowl, with the same level of evidence, there'd be serious talk of stripping the Patriots of The Championship...)

But I would also expect anyone taking that position to support Barry Bonds being voted into The Hall Of Fame, because it is equally true that if he had never taken steroids... (for which there is far less evidence relatively speaking then someone on the Patriots team deflating those balls...The evidence against Barry amounts to, "just look at him"...the evidence on the ball deflation involves the laws of physics...)

that Bonds would have been voted into The Hall Of Fame anyway...

Which is certainly true, give his career stats...

Anyone care to embrace that position?

[wesw]

how about the position that other teams are pissed because Andrew luck hadn t figured out that every quarterback gets the balls he wants? I d bet that the other teams are more pissed at the colts than the Pats over this and that the rule will be amended to allow a wider variation in inflation pressures. my understanding is that the rule s purpose is to prevent the kickers from overinflating balls to achieve longer kicks anyway. I d also bet that when peyton manning was with the colts they did the same thing, seeing as how he supports changing the rule...

[Lord Jim]

the rule s purpose is to prevent the kickers from overinflating balls

No.

The rule's purpose is to prevent under inflation of the balls, because an under inflated ball affords the Quarter Back a firmer grip, and makes it easier for a receiver to catch and hold...

[wesw]

that not what they said when ray guy was still kickin'....

[Joe Guy]

Well, it looks like Brady has been found guilty by the NFL.

If this doesn't lose on appeal, Brady should not be allowed into the hall of fame and he should be shunned by true football fans everywhere. He has been exposed as a cheater, which means that his stats are as inflated as his footballs are deflated.

[Lord Jim]

It's funny, I was chided to "read the report" but the more of it I read, the more I became convinced (first by reading the section on the ball testing, and then the section on the text exchanges) that these guys were caught dead-to-rights; including Brady...

I think with a four game suspension Brady is getting off easy given not just his role in the ball deflation, but also his continuing denials of any involvement, and his effort to obstruct the investigation by withholding evidence. (His texts and emails.)

Brady is both a cheater and a liar.

[Guinevere]

Bull-effing-crap.

Beat the crap out of an actual human being, on camera while the head coach says "it's no big deal" = 2 games. After 4 months of investigations, find that it is likely that the QB told the ball boy he likes the footballs soft = 4 games, plus fine the team 1mil even though there is zero evidence that the team or anyone beyond the ball boy had anything to do with it. Yeah, sounds totally fair and appropriate.

From Mike McCann, SI, lawyer - last week:

My thought is to assess what would be the appropriate penalty for Brady if you judge him in the worst light possible. Let's say he knew the two other employees were taking steps to keep ball pressure below PSI rule and he took steps to keep that activity concealed. 1) He would not have been the one doing the deflation; 2) I'm not aware of Brady having a duty to report on other employees. He still would be in the wrong--both morally and by NFL rule--but he would have helped to coverup an infraction that carries a $25K fine. I just don't see the logic of going from helping others carry out an act that the NFL considered so unimportant that it carries a mere $25K fine to a suspension, which is the harshest form of penalty. I could see Brady fined--and perhaps face a hefty fine at that--but going from a fine to a suspension where the underlying act (committed by others) only carries a fine is a huge qualitative jump that wouldn't add up here, IMO.

And by the way, since when does anyone have to relinquish their right to privacy by turning over a private phone? NFL, if you want it, get a damn subpoena or an administrative search warrant. I got one on Friday for a client. But then, I was able to show probable cause.

[Lord Jim]

anyone beyond the ball boy had anything to do with it.

Ah yes, the "rogue ball boy theory"...

Makes perfect sense...

[Lord Jim]

Brady's agent, Don Yee, told CNN's Anderson Cooper that the quarterback didn't agree to hand over text messages because that would set a bad precedent for other players involved in disciplinary investigations.

That sounded familiar to me...

Then I remembered that it's the same excuse Nixon used for fighting all the way to the Supreme Court to avoid handing over the tapes...

[Long Run]

Well, that might be, or it may be this is more like the other special prosecutor situations where the prosecutor acted more like Ahab; with the real risk the NFL investigator would reveal personal texts that have nothing to do with the ball tampering issue, you know, like the irrelevant but personally damaging texts the investigator put in his report from the two employees who did turn over their phones.

There is plausible deniability, but the rogue ball boy theory of defense is pretty weak. It is likely that the penalty will be substantially reduced as the evidence is circumstantial, but to reduce it might mean coming up with a decent alternative explanation for what happened.

[Big RR]

A four game suspension seems a bit excessive to me--especially since I think we can all agree it did not affect the outcome of the game--but I am not that familiar with the NFL rules on penalties. It seems to me to be a pretty minor infraction, but I also think the NFL has to enforce its rules or they become meaningless. I'm sure this is being done by a lot of teams (so I would bet was the bounty programs (or something like it) New Orleans got (rightfully IMHO) punished for a few years back. Brady and the Patriots are in the same unenviable position of being ones who got caught (and please, if nothing else a quarterback of Brady's experience and talent knows when a ball is underinflated and even if this is done for him often) and thus, the ones who will be the example for all the other team. If he or the team want to appeal, fine; but let's hope the debate doesn't run through the entire season.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Brady and/or the Pats will appeal and the suspension will get reduced (to one game I am guessing) and perhaps the fine too.

[Lord Jim]

I would bet that in retrospect, if Brady and the Patriots organization had known how thorough Wells was going to be with his investigation, that they might have taken a more forthcoming approach at the outset; rather than the arrogant, scoffing, "deny, deny, deny" stonewall strategy they adopted...

If Brady had come forward at the beginning of this and said something, "Look, it's pretty obvious that the balls were deliberately deflated. I admit that I like a ball at the low end of the allowable range, and that the folks who prep and keep the balls during the game are aware of my preference. It's possible that what happened was done because they somehow mistakenly interpreted my preference as a desire for them to deflate the balls. If that's what happened, I apologize for any part I played in the miscommunication."

That at least presents a plausible scenario, consistent with a charitable reading of the known facts; and it would also have involved him taking at least some level of responsibility. (I personally believe that the time line of the texts, emails, and phone conversations and the unprecedented meeting he had in the QB room strongly suggest a level of knowledge and involvement greater than that, but as I said at least that position would be plausible.)

But of course, that's not what he did...not by a long shot...

I'm sure that the punishment that has been imposed is as strong as it is at least as much for his (and the team's) evasive and uncooperative behavior as for the ball deflation itself.

[Big RR]

Jim--as much as the public loves the scenario--the man standing in dark glasses, his head hung low, his voice cracking with emotion (and as much as we never see the celebration when the accused toasts his luck at cutting his fine/suspension in half (or better), it doesn't always work (Ray Rice and Adrian Petersen can tell you that). Like Guin alluded to, I do think there is a part of football sports fandom who would like to see the Patriots and Brady taken down a few pegs (partly because the win so much, partly for other reasons), so I'm not sure that your proposal would have worked (and I doubt Brady or Bellichick are sufficiently good actors to pull it off convincingly and generate sympathy among these anti-fans).

[Guinevere]

Let's roll the tape:

Yee's original statement upon the release of the Well's "report:"
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12839 ... lls-report

"The Wells report, with all due respect, is a significant and terrible disappointment. It's omission of key facts and lines of inquiry suggest the investigators reached a conclusion first, and then determined so-called facts later.

"One fact alone taints this entire report. What does it say about the league office's protocols and ethics when it allows one team to tip it off to an issue prior to a championship game, and no league officials or game officials notified the Patriots of the same issue prior to the game? This suggests it may be more probable than not that the league cooperated with the Colts in perpetrating a sting operation. The Wells report buries this issue in a footnote on page 46 without any further elaboration.

"The league is a significant client of the investigators' law firm; it appears to be a rich source of billings and media exposure based on content in the law firm's website. This was not an independent investigation and the contents of the report bear that out -- all one has to do is read closely and critically, as opposed to simply reading headlines.

"The investigators' assumptions and inferences are easily debunked or subject to multiple interpretations. Much of the report's vulnerabilities are buried in the footnotes, which is a common legal writing tactic. It is a sad day for the league as it has abdicated the resolution of football-specific issues to people who don't understand the context or culture of the sport.

"I was physically present for my client's interview. I have verbatim notes of the interview. Tom made himself available for nearly an entire day and patiently answered every question. It was clear to me the investigators had limited understanding of professional football. For reasons unknown, the Wells report omitted nearly all of Tom's testimony, most of which was critical because it would have provided this report with the context that it lacks.

"Mr. Wells promised back in January to share the results of this investigation publicly, so why not follow through and make public all of the information gathered and let the public draw its own conclusions? This report contains significant and tragic flaws, and it is common knowledge in the legal industry that reports like this generally are written for the benefit of the purchaser."

Statement upon notification of the "discipline:"
http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england-pat ... adys-agent

“The discipline is ridiculous and has no legitimate basis. In my opinion, this outcome was pre-determined; there was no fairness in the Wells investigation whatsoever. There is no evidence that Tom directed footballs be set at pressures below the allowable limits. In fact, the evidence shows Tom clearly emphasized that footballs be set at pressures within the rules. Tom also cooperated with the investigation and answered every question presented to him.

"The Wells Report presents significant evidence, however, that the NFL lacks standards or protocols with respect to its handling of footballs prior to games; this is not the fault of Tom or the Patriots. The report also presents significant evidence the NFL participated with the Colts in some type of pre-AFC Championship Game planning regarding the footballs. This fact may raise serious questions about the integrity of the games we view on Sundays.

"We will appeal, and if the hearing officer is completely independent and neutral, I am very confident the Wells Report will be exposed as an incredibly frail exercise in fact-finding and logic. The NFL has a well-documented history of making poor disciplinary decisions that often are overturned when truly independent and neutral judges or arbitrators preside, and a former federal judge has found the commissioner has abused his discretion in the past, so this outcome does not surprise me. Sadly, today’s decision diminishes the NFL as it tells its fans, players and coaches that the games on the field don’t count as much as the games played on Park Avenue.”

What Yee said on Anderson Cooper/360 (which was said after the report was released, but prior to any "discipline" being announced):

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foo ... -ted-wells

“Without really getting into my communications with my client — I have to observe attorney-client privilege — but if you’re in a situation when it comes to disciplinary process when you’re generally assigned guilt and asked to prove innocence,” Yee said. “That’s number one. Proving innocence is essentially proving a negative, if you proclaim innocence. And so that’s a very difficult situation to put yourself in.

“Second, with the text messages, the scope that they asked for is actually very, very wide. I probably should have made the letter public that we received from the NFL’s lawyers. But in any event, if we would have provided the phone or the text messages — you have to understand Tom is also a member of the union, the Commissioner’s office actually does not have any subpoena power. If a prominent player were to provide all of their private communications absent a subpoena, that sets a dangerous precedent for all players facing disciplinary measures.

“Finally, any information we would have provided, and the Wells investigative team did ask us to go through Tom’s phone on our own and provide them with information if we chose to go that route. But as you might surmise if we would have chosen to go that route, any information we would have given them, they probably would have had skepticism about anyway.”

Hmmm, seems like the lawyers viewing this case have pretty similar views of the evidence, the process, and the procedure.

[Guinevere]

What lawyer and SI columnist Mike McCann has to say:

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/12/deflat ... al-options

[Lord Jim]

I do think there is a part of football sports fandom who would like to see the Patriots and Brady taken down a few pegs

Big RR, I agree that there are certainly some folks out there who just plain flat out despise the Patriots and/or Brady. I think I mentioned in the original discussion that we had about this that I get the impression that The Patriots and Brady are just about as popular with the fans of other AFC teams as The Cowboys and Romo are with the fans of other NFC teams...

If it had been been put up to a vote of those fans, Brady would probably have gotten a year's suspension, (if not a lifetime ban) and the Patriots would have gotten a 100 million dollar fine...

But they're not the ones making the decisions here...

If Brady and the Patriots really wanted to see some reduction in the punishment they have received for the cheating and their obstruction of the subsequent investigation, now would logically be the time for some humility and contrition on their part.

But not this bunch; instead they've decided to double down (hell, triple or quadruple down) on arrogance and denial, to the point now where they are even attempting to smear Wells and his investigation. (Some of the stuff coming from Yee, Brady's agent, makes it look like he's having some sort of meltdown... I can't believe he actually thinks he's helping his client with these sneering histrionics and completely unsubstantiated allegations)

Apparently the strategy is to somehow bully the NFL with bloviating bluster into reducing or revoking the punishment. If I were Goodell, I'd add this no-class response of theirs (particularly the effort to smear Wells) to the list of things (the original cheating, the lying about it, and the efforts to obstruct the investigation) that they should be punished for, and double the fine and suspension time.

And then I'd ask them if they had anything else they'd like to say...

If they refuse to do the right and decent thing and finally take some responsibility and demonstrate some contrition, the least they could do is end their malicious whining and STFU.

[Big RR]

Yeah, there are all kinds of theories. Yesterday I was watching ESPN and saw a couple of commentators maintaining (with a straight face nonetheless) that the NFL was coming down on Brady because black athletes have complained of the discipline meted out to them and the NFL wanted to show that even the "Golden Boy" (Brady) would be disciplined harshly for infractions. Now I have no position on whether black athletes are treated unfairly, but somehow I just can't see the NFL hierarchy sitting around a conference table saying "We'd better come down hard or Brady to appease the black athletes", nor would I think those who maintain that the black athletes are treated unfairly would be fooled by such a ploy. But I can see those who want to stir up racial animosity making that claim publicly.

As for what the team and Brady are doing now, it seems they have backed themselves into a corner and have to contionue along that path; they are beyond trying to be conciliatory (and while Brady might be able to fake it, I don't think I could every see Bellichick being conciliatory).

My guess is that they will appeal (possibly to the courts, but then Brady's phone records could be subpoenaed, so maybe not), and that Brady will get a game of two knocked off the suspension, and the Patriots will get a reduced fine but still lose the draft picks (which is probably what the NFL should have done in the first place). Patriot fans will argue it's unfair, and Patriot haters will bitch it's too light, which will probably mean that the reduced penalty matches the severity of the offense.