#DeflateGate (Court of Appeals Reinstates Suspension)

[Roy H.]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

The explanations for "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" aren't laughable.  These texts were selected out of thousands over an 8 month span.  You can be suspicious of the explanations, but to dismiss them entirely is hardly reasonable.

No, "laughable" was the right word.  I dismiss the explanations entirely, particularly the season tickets explanation. That explanation has literally zero credibility.

[knuckleballer]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

The explanations for "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" aren't laughable.  These texts were selected out of thousands over an 8 month span.  You can be suspicious of the explanations, but to dismiss them entirely is hardly reasonable.

No, "laughable" was the right word.  I dismiss the explanations entirely, particularly the season tickets explanation. That explanation has literally zero credibility.

So he wasn't selling tickets?  There isn't a third guy who says that he told Jastremski that McNally must have been under stress in doing so and who also said he would be willing to talk to Wells about the conversation?  All three men are lying about this and you know that? 

[footey]

I've been in cases where the judge has made every ruling against my side, significantly questioned and hammered my side far more than the other side, etc. only to then have the judge rule in my client's favor.  Makes an appeal almost impossible if you give the side you will ultimately rule against everything they want.  In this case, it also seems that the NFL's settlement position is the more unreasonable position (i.e. requiring Brady to acknowledge the Wells Report and essentially admit guilt) and thus that is the side I would be hammering on if I wanted to force a settlement.  That is basically law 101 for mediators, arbitrators, judges, etc.  It doesn't mean he won't rule against the NFL, I just wouldn't stake any significant dollars on it.  Outward appearances are often deceiving from judges.

Yeah, judging a case based upon a Judge's questions is, frankly, stupid. I'm a former law clerk, and a lot of times, my judge asked the winning side tougher questions because she knew what she was going to do, and wanted further argument to fill in the weak gaps in a potential opinion.  Of course, there were cases where she asked the losing side the more skeptical questions, too, because she was, well, skeptical.

Oral argument is fairly unimportant in my experience. It's mostly briefs + clerk research from my experience.

You probably read the briefs.  Whose are more persuasive?

Sorry, Roy, just curious if you read both briefs, and whose you found more persuasive?

[Roy H.]

I've been in cases where the judge has made every ruling against my side, significantly questioned and hammered my side far more than the other side, etc. only to then have the judge rule in my client's favor.  Makes an appeal almost impossible if you give the side you will ultimately rule against everything they want.  In this case, it also seems that the NFL's settlement position is the more unreasonable position (i.e. requiring Brady to acknowledge the Wells Report and essentially admit guilt) and thus that is the side I would be hammering on if I wanted to force a settlement.  That is basically law 101 for mediators, arbitrators, judges, etc.  It doesn't mean he won't rule against the NFL, I just wouldn't stake any significant dollars on it.  Outward appearances are often deceiving from judges.

Yeah, judging a case based upon a Judge's questions is, frankly, stupid. I'm a former law clerk, and a lot of times, my judge asked the winning side tougher questions because she knew what she was going to do, and wanted further argument to fill in the weak gaps in a potential opinion.  Of course, there were cases where she asked the losing side the more skeptical questions, too, because she was, well, skeptical.

Oral argument is fairly unimportant in my experience. It's mostly briefs + clerk research from my experience.

You probably read the briefs.  Whose are more persuasive?

Sorry, Roy, just curious if you read both briefs, and whose you found more persuasive?

I haven't. My guess is that they're both fairly persuasive, since they probably cost $700 per hour to write.

[Roy H.]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

The explanations for "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" aren't laughable.  These texts were selected out of thousands over an 8 month span.  You can be suspicious of the explanations, but to dismiss them entirely is hardly reasonable.

No, "laughable" was the right word.  I dismiss the explanations entirely, particularly the season tickets explanation. That explanation has literally zero credibility.

So he wasn't selling tickets?  There isn't a third guy who says that he told Jastremski that McNally must have been under stress in doing so and who also said he would be willing to talk to Wells about the conversation?  All three men are lying about this and you know that?

There is a 0% chance that that conversation was about selling tickets. No reasonable person could believe that it was, in context. So yes, I unequivocally know that that explanation for that text is a lie.

[knuckleballer]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

The explanations for "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" aren't laughable.  These texts were selected out of thousands over an 8 month span.  You can be suspicious of the explanations, but to dismiss them entirely is hardly reasonable.

No, "laughable" was the right word.  I dismiss the explanations entirely, particularly the season tickets explanation. That explanation has literally zero credibility.

So he wasn't selling tickets?  There isn't a third guy who says that he told Jastremski that McNally must have been under stress in doing so and who also said he would be willing to talk to Wells about the conversation?  All three men are lying about this and you know that?

There is a 0% chance that that conversation was about selling tickets. No reasonable person could believe that it was, in context. So yes, I unequivocally know that that explanation for that text is a lie.

No, you do not unequivocally know that.  You are just speculating.  It was a perfectly reasonable explanation confirmed by all three parties.  It is impossible for you to know that they were all lying.  Wells interrogated McNally for over 7 hours and Jastremski for, I think, 4 hours and he couldn't get them to slip up.  And he declined to speak to the third guy.  It's fair to doubt them, but 0% chance... no.

As far as context, you do not know what other communication these guys had, you only know the text messages Wells put in the report.

[smicker16]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

The explanations for "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" aren't laughable.  These texts were selected out of thousands over an 8 month span.  You can be suspicious of the explanations, but to dismiss them entirely is hardly reasonable.

No, "laughable" was the right word.  I dismiss the explanations entirely, particularly the season tickets explanation. That explanation has literally zero credibility.

It seems like you believe they were doing something which is totally understandable as there are strong points to that. But there are very strong points on the other side. The main thing is that through all of those text messages from those two guys the clearest thing is a message where they explicitly say the balls should have been at 13 psi for the Jets game. So if you believe the deflator comment is related, which it sounds like you do what is your explanation for the Jets game? That Brady figured a team he always struggles against he wouldn't have them deflate the balls? That I am sorry is more laughable than the explanation when deflate is a term used in weight loss frequently. Even done by the NFL a few years ago as they had a piece about that. I have yet to hear one explanation for that Jets game from someone who believes they were doing something.

[knuckleballer]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

The explanations for "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" aren't laughable.  These texts were selected out of thousands over an 8 month span.  You can be suspicious of the explanations, but to dismiss them entirely is hardly reasonable.

No, "laughable" was the right word.  I dismiss the explanations entirely, particularly the season tickets explanation. That explanation has literally zero credibility.

It seems like you believe they were doing something which is totally understandable as there are strong points to that. But there are very strong points on the other side. The main thing is that through all of those text messages from those two guys the clearest thing is a message where they explicitly say the balls should have been at 13 psi for the Jets game. So if you believe the deflator comment is related, which it sounds like you do what is your explanation for the Jets game? That Brady figured a team he always struggles against he wouldn't have them deflate the balls? That I am sorry is more laughable than the explanation when deflate is a term used in weight loss frequently. Even done by the NFL a few years ago as they had a piece about that. I have yet to hear one explanation for that Jets game from someone who believes they were doing something.

Yeah, and McNally is loose with his terminology throughout his texts.  There's humor throughout his texts. He's that kind of guy which is what Tedy Bruschi and others have said about him.  He goes by the name "Bird" afterall.  And let's not forget that the guy he was talking to prepares footballs for a living.  He inflates and deflates footballs a hundred plus times a week.  It's not weird for words from your daily job to enter your vernacular for other related meanings.  There is another text from Bird using "deflate" for a meaning that had nothing to do with ball pressure.  Are we supposed ignore that?

And of course, your point about the "13 psi" text contradicts any notion there was any scheme until after the October Jets game.  The fact that Brady asked for the psi rules after that game and telling Jastremski to show them to the refs contradicts as well.  It's unfortunate that Wells listed that text once in the middle of his report and listed texts that it contradicts 20-25 times throughout it. It's unfortunate that so many who express their opinion so frequently on this subject ignore that text as it doesn't fit their narrative.

[JSD]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

Okay, I'll play.

So, in context, on May 9, 2014, McNally called himself, "the deflator" for what reason? Using everything we know what's the most logical explanation for it?

[JSD]

In May of 2014, if it was McNally's job was to deflate footballs after in-game approval, then why did Brady and the Patriots give NFL refs a copy of PSI rule in October 2014?



http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25259755/tom-brady-says-pats-gave-refs-a-copy-of-psi-rule-in-october

[PhoSita]

What if McNally's job was to deflate the balls to fit Tom's preferences --- within the range prescribed by the rules?

We have heard that the balls are often over-inflated, and that Tom's stated preference is for them to be on the lower end of the range.

So, couldn't McNally refer to himself, jokingly or otherwise, as "the deflator" in that context?  Especially if Tom frequently makes a big deal out of the balls being prepared to his specifications, including making sure they are not overinflated?

That's a plausible explanation that doesn't involve rule-breaking.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Couple important points:

- Roger Goodell is a clown.

- ESPN is a joke.

- Patriot haters live in a land of make believe.

- As do the fervent Patriots supporters

- Tom Brady isn't particularly credible

- The "deflator" and "I was referring to selling season tickets" excuses are laughable

Very few folks are viewing this one neutrally.

This is off topic. Just pointing out I find it interesting when people are fans of 1 team in a region, but not another team in another sport in the same region.  I know plenty of people like this, one in particular with a strange mix of Yankees and Jets fan, but likes the Celtics and Bruins.

This baffles me too. I don't see how a person can like any Boston team and NOT despise every New York team. Especially the dang Jets.

[JSD]

What if McNally's job was to deflate the balls to fit Tom's preferences --- within the range prescribed by the rules?

We have heard that the balls are often over-inflated, and that Tom's stated preference is for them to be on the lower end of the range.

So, couldn't McNally refer to himself, jokingly or otherwise, as "the deflator" in that context?  Especially if Tom frequently makes a big deal out of the balls being prepared to his specifications, including making sure they are not overinflated?

That's a plausible explanation that doesn't involve rule-breaking.

Absolutely.

[knuckleballer]

In May of 2014, if it was McNally's job was to deflate footballs after in-game approval, then why did Brady and the Patriots give NFL refs a copy of PSI rule in October 2014?



http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25259755/tom-brady-says-pats-gave-refs-a-copy-of-psi-rule-in-october

Bringing the ref's attention to the rules doesn't exactly seem like a smart thing when you are about to break those rules. 

And why would Jastremski expect the balls to be about 13 in October if they were running a scheme going back to May to deflate the balls to under 12.5?  It doesn't add up.

[knuckleballer]

What if McNally's job was to deflate the balls to fit Tom's preferences --- within the range prescribed by the rules?

We have heard that the balls are often over-inflated, and that Tom's stated preference is for them to be on the lower end of the range.

So, couldn't McNally refer to himself, jokingly or otherwise, as "the deflator" in that context?  Especially if Tom frequently makes a big deal out of the balls being prepared to his specifications, including making sure they are not overinflated?

That's a plausible explanation that doesn't involve rule-breaking.

Absolutely.

I don't agree with this.  McNally is in the ref's locker room when they test the balls.  If he sees the balls being overinflated, he can point out the rules at that time.