2015 NFL Football Thread

[Golfingdad]

I didn't plan on bringing this discussion here, but the other thread has been closed...

One thing about the latest example of the Patriots cheating that burns me is that the talking heads don't even read the report.  I just watched Bill Simmons and Dan Patrick talk about the issue and they both agreed that Brady was right to refuse to turn over his phone because his whole life is probably on there.  The report clearly says he was only asked to have his lawyer hand over texts/emails about inflating or deflating the ball.  Get the simple facts right.

Another is all these people saying "there's no evidence" because there's no direct evidence, only circumstantial.  You know who else tried that defense?  The Patriot's TE that was convicted of murder based on circumstantial evidence.

And lastly, the nonsense about 51% or "more probable than not."  That doesn't mean that there was only a 51% likelihood, that means the 51% threshold was met or exceeded.

Wells was charged with determining whether it was more probable than not that the guys cheated.  He found that it was.  It doesn't mean that a higher standard couldn't have been satisfied, it just means that the applicable threshold was met.

These are such simple, right/wrong things that everybody who defends the Patriots are getting wrong.

In all seriousness though, the only thing that I take exception to here is the idea of being labeled a Patriots "defender."  I don't defend anything that the Patriots did or didn't do.  I don't even like the Patriots.  I defend equality.  And I contend that this is only something that matters to people because it's the Patriots.  I believe that if any other team were dropped into this position last January, it would have been a non-story from day 1.

That is why I post things like yourteamcheats.com ... granted it's 95% done just for a laugh, but it's also a reminder that it's not 31 squeaky clean programs vs. Darth Vader and the Empire here.  I wish Brady wouldn't deflate footballs, but I also wish the Chargers wouldn't use stickem, and the Saints wouldn't put bounties on players heads, and I especially wish 3 or 4 teams wouldn't cheat the salary cap (something for which I think a very solid argument could be made is a far, far greater transgression from a "gain an edge" standpoint than ANY of the other things on those lists)

And I'm certainly not going to object if the league decides to punish the Patriots, but I do object to the idea of the "Cheatriots" and Bill "Belicheat."  Stupid, childish stuff.  It is also my contention that even without either of those "crimes" that their record would be identical at this point.  Nobody's putting asterisks next to anybody else's names in the record book (talking mostly about the salary cap cheaters), so lets not do that with them either.  Mmmkay?

[saevel25]

I didn't plan on bringing this discussion here, but the other thread has been closed...

One thing about the latest example of the Patriots cheating that burns me is that the talking heads don't even read the report.  I just watched Bill Simmons and Dan Patrick talk about the issue and they both agreed that Brady was right to refuse to turn over his phone because his whole life is probably on there.  The report clearly says he was only asked to have his lawyer hand over texts/emails about inflating or deflating the ball.  Get the simple facts right.

Doesn't matter. Even if the NFL asks for the phone or any information Tom Brady isn't legally required to do so. This is a private investigate with no subpoena power available by the NFL. A lot of people confuse the two. Also, denying access to your personal information is not an admission to guilt.

This report is a piece of crap.  And comparing deflating of footballs to a murder trial is pretty lazy.

Again this is comparing a private investigation into a non-criminal event versus a capital murder case. Not even in the same stratosphere here.

Come on.  Clearly my point was that if circumstantial evidence is good enough to put someone away for life for murder then its good enough to suspend the golden boy for a couple games.

You agree that the ball guy took the balls to the bathroom and put a pin in them to deflate them right?  If you answer this directly with a yes or no the conversation can be much more clear cut.

Not really. As  pointed out in that article circumstantial evidence might point towards guilty it does not prove guilty. If the NFL wants to stick its head out and condemn Brady with out one piece of actual solid evidence implicating Brady as the instigator of the deflagate then that's fine. Then they will have to sit with the possibility they just defamed  one of the best QB's in history and probably a sure first round HOF candidate. If they are found to be wrong then I am sure Tom Brady would then have ample ammunition to sue the NFL for defamation. With the amount of money Tom makes it would be a substantial law suite.

I can say the ball guy did it. Can I say that Brady instigated it, nope. That is the issue. You are assuming just because it happened then Brady is at fault with no significant evidence to actually show he is guilty in instigating the deflating of the balls.

[Gunther]

Doesn't matter. Even if the NFL asks for the phone or any information Tom Brady isn't legally required to do so. This is a private investigate with no subpoena power available by the NFL. A lot of people confuse the two. Also, denying access to your personal information is not an admission to guilt.  Again this is comparing a private investigation into a non-criminal event versus a capital murder case. Not even in the same stratosphere here.  Not really. As  pointed out in that article circumstantial evidence might point towards guilty it does not prove guilty. If the NFL wants to stick its head out and condemn Brady with out one piece of actual solid evidence implicating Brady as the instigator of the deflagate then that's fine. Then they will have to sit with the possibility they just defamed  one of the best QB's in history and probably a sure first round HOF candidate. If they are found to be wrong then I am sure Tom Brady would then have ample ammunition to sue the NFL for defamation. With the amount of money Tom makes it would be a substantial law suite.  I can say the ball guy did it. Can I say that Brady instigated it, nope. That is the issue. You are assuming just because it happened then Brady is at fault with no significant evidence to actually show he is guilty in instigating the deflating of the balls.

As you say, this isn't a court of law; hence, the evidence doesn't have to prove guilt. The league can do what it wants here and as Cuban stated, it won't be Goodell determining it, it'll be the vocal owners. I think Kraft is well-liked and respected by his peers so I don't think a lot will come of it but there will be something. Any non-biased person can determine Brady lied, that in itself is enough for a suspension, probably 4 games if I were a betting man.

[turtleback]

I'm not saying its black and white that Tom Brady orchestrated this thing (I think he did, but unless he admits it we can never know for certain).  I'm saying the conversation is false because those three black/white, right/wrong issues are not understood by the people who are talking about the issue.

I have yet to hear a single Patriots outsider with NFL experience who has said anything other than, "No equipment man would mess with the game footballs without the QB's knowledge and direction.  To think that a) something happened, but b) Brady had no part, simple strains incredulity.

But you are right  Not only has most of the media writing about and speaking about it did not read the report, I suspect the same is true for most of the participants in this thread.

I also think that right from the start the team knew or found out what happened and what the evidence was going to be.  If you go back and look at the statements Brady, Bellichick, and Kraft made a few days after, one of the things that stands out to me is the obvious attempt to influence what the standard should be, with their talk of "Certainty" and "smoking gun."  While millions and billions of dollars are disposed of, by the courts, based on exactly the same same preponderance of evidence standard that applies to NFL issues, Brady's agent and the Patriot apologists are downplaying that standard.

Doesn't matter. Even if the NFL asks for the phone or any information Tom Brady isn't legally required to do so. This is a private investigate with no subpoena power available by the NFL. A lot of people confuse the two. Also, denying access to your personal information is not an admission to guilt.

Yes.  And so Brady cannot be convicted of a crime.  Perfectly true and completely irrelevant to the discussion, since no one is talking about putting Brady in jail.  Just as claims that there is no certainty or a smoking gun are completely irrelevant.  For the same reason - no one is talking about putting anyone in jail and that is the only context in which beyond reasonable doubt matters.

HOWEVER, he is subject to the NFL players contract and NFL rules which state that both players and teams must cooperate fully with league investigations.  So while he is not subject to legal sanction for his failure to turn over the requested material, he is certainly subject to discipline under league rules and procedures.  As is the team itself for its stonewalling.  And the standard of proof the NFL has adopted is preponderance of the evidence, the same one used in every single non-criminal trial in the country.

[dsc123]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

In all seriousness though, the only thing that I take exception to here is the idea of being labeled a Patriots "defender."  I don't defend anything that the Patriots did or didn't do.  I don't even like the Patriots.  I defend equality.  And I contend that this is only something that matters to people because it's the Patriots.  I believe that if any other team were dropped into this position last January, it would have been a non-story from day 1.

That is why I post things like yourteamcheats.com ... granted it's 95% done just for a laugh, but it's also a reminder that it's not 31 squeaky clean programs vs. Darth Vader and the Empire here.  I wish Brady wouldn't deflate footballs, but I also wish the Chargers wouldn't use stickem, and the Saints wouldn't put bounties on players heads, and I especially wish 3 or 4 teams wouldn't cheat the salary cap (something for which I think a very solid argument could be made is a far, far greater transgression from a "gain an edge" standpoint than ANY of the other things on those lists)

And I'm certainly not going to object if the league decides to punish the Patriots, but I do object to the idea of the "Cheatriots" and Bill "Belicheat."  Stupid, childish stuff.  It is also my contention that even without either of those "crimes" that their record would be identical at this point.  Nobody's putting asterisks next to anybody else's names in the record book (talking mostly about the salary cap cheaters), so lets not do that with them either.  Mmmkay?

You were defending them, and you were doing so on the basis of those very misunderstandings.  But you seem to have come around on that since they were explained.  That's the value of conversation and I commend you for that.

I totally get the argument that the record wouldn't change if they didn't cheat.  I don't think that matters, but I get understand it.  That's an agree to disagree thing in my book.  Its more about values and judgment calls.

As for your everyone cheats link, my team, the Saintly Buffalo Bills, have one offense in my lifetime, other than the "all 32 team" offenses.  They once misreported an injury.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

Doesn't matter. Even if the NFL asks for the phone or any information Tom Brady isn't legally required to do so. This is a private investigate with no subpoena power available by the NFL. A lot of people confuse the two. Also, denying access to your personal information is not an admission to guilt.

I really have trouble understanding what your points are.  I agree that Brady did not break any laws.  I also understand how subpoenas work.  I understand that Brady was not required by law to turn over his phone.  I am not advocating jail time.  I'm not confusing the two.

To be honest, you are confusing the two.  A criminal defendant's refusal to testify against himself cannot be used against him, but that's only in a criminal trial.  In just about any other context, if you obstruct the discovery of relevant evidence, the trier of fact is entitled to presume that the evidence would harm your case.  This is not a criminal case, therefore we can hold it against him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

Again this is comparing a private investigation into a non-criminal event versus a capital murder case. Not even in the same stratosphere here.

I don't know what this means.  I compared it to the murder trial of the Patriots' player to make the point that "circumstantial" does not mean "weak."  My point is that its silly to dismiss anything other than direct evidence in deflategate, when we don't even require that before committing a person to life in prison.  The standard is HIGHER in murder cases and LOWER in employment disputes.  By dismissing the evidence against Brady as "merely circumstantial", people are imposing a HIGHER standard to prove that a patriots player cheated than was applied to determine whether a patriots player murdered someone.

I'm not sure how else to say this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

Not really. As  pointed out in that article circumstantial evidence might point towards guilty it does not prove guilty. If the NFL wants to stick its head out and condemn Brady with out one piece of actual solid evidence implicating Brady as the instigator of the deflagate then that's fine. Then they will have to sit with the possibility they just defamed  one of the best QB's in history and probably a sure first round HOF candidate. If they are found to be wrong then I am sure Tom Brady would then have ample ammunition to sue the NFL for defamation. With the amount of money Tom makes it would be a substantial law suite.

Again, its really hard to understand what you're saying, but I'll try.

I don't know what you mean by "prove."  Do you mean it in the mathematical sense that it is absolutely, beyond any question the truth?  That's not what it means in this context.  It means to establish the required amount of evidence.  Thus, in this case, the charges against Brady are "proven" if the NFL demonstrates that they are more probable than not.  Here:  http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prove

I disagree that there isn't any "solid evidence."  Also, remember that the investigator determined that Brady's explanations were not credible.  Everything is relative.  There is a pile of evidence on one side that looks bad, and the alternative explanation is not believed.

Its also not defamation.  Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25
I can say the ball guy did it. Can I say that Brady instigated it, nope. That is the issue. You are assuming just because it happened then Brady is at fault with no significant evidence to actually show he is guilty in instigating the deflating of the balls.

Okay.  There.  So you agree that the ball guy did it.

So we have a ball guy whose asking Brady to approve the balls, then after Brady approves them, is putting a needle into the balls to deflate them.  And he knows this is illegal.  They both admitted that by the time of the playoff game, they knew the rule.  And he's doing this because he thinks Brady wants it that way right?  And he knows that Brady can tell the difference because he flipped out after the Jets game when the balls were at 16psi.

All of that weighs in favor of Brady knowing, right?  I'm not saying it "proves it", just that it trends in that direction, right?

And then you've got these text messages that all center around Brady, and that also trends in that direction right?  Some talk about Brady getting mad.  Some talk about Brady paying them off.  They refer to Brady acknowldging that its "stressful" to deflate the balls.  No smoking gun but it looks bad.

So you go to the guys and you say, hey, this is Brady you're talking about, right?  And they say, no its my friend Bob.  So the investigator says he wants to talk to Bob and the Patriots Lawyer comes out and sets all kinds of conditions.  He stays anonymous (which means nobody can come out and contradict it).  He will only talk over the phone (so you can't see his body language, or who else is in the room, or that he looks to the lawyer after every question).  And the investigator agrees because he has no subpoena power.  And he considers what the guy says, along with the circumstances of the interview, and decides that the guy is probably lying.  That doesn't just preserve the status quo, that too goes guilt because now it looks like they're making stuff up.

And then you say, alright, let's see what Tom has to say.  And tom comes in and denies everything.  He even denies knowing who McNally is, even though everyone else testified that he did know who the guy is.  So you've got what you think is a self serving lie, coupled with selfserving denials of liability, and you say "okay, well lets see the documents you have so we can verify this stuff."  And Tom says no.  And you make it as narrow as you can--just give the texts about inflating/deflating, I'll let your lawyer pick em out so we don't even see them.  And he still says no.  So now Tom looks like a liar and the needle goes further to guilty.

Then go you back to the Patriots and say hey, I've got these new text messages that I didn't have when I talked to your guys before.  I'd like to ask them about this.  And the Patriots lawyer says no.

So you look at the text messages that indicates that Brady knew, and there's quite a bit there.  Maybe you're not certain, but it looks like he knew.  Then you look to the Patriots' explanations and none of it makes sense.  The texts were either about Brady or they weren't.  When the explanations as to why they weren't don't add up, what does that leave you with?  That's how something short of smoking gun becomes enough.  As they said in the report:

Quote:

Jastremski‟s text message thus attributes to Brady knowledge of McNally‟s efforts to get the footballs “done” and the stress involved.  We reject as implausible the reading offered by Jastremski, McNally and counsel for the Patriots that portions of this exchange refer to Jastremski‟s Friend rather than to Brady.

Then you look at the phone records and see that Brady never calls this guy, but started calling him twice a day when the news broke.  Invited him to the QB room for the first time ever.  Kept checking up on him to makes sure he was okay.

Then you look at everything you've got and wonder whether the alternate explanation makes sense.  Would these ball guys, who apparently think the golden boy is a jerk, deflate the balls without his knowledge?  Probably not.

That's how you get to 51% without a smoking gun.

[Abu3baid]

Well it is a bumpy start for the NFL top draft pick.

http://news.yahoo.com/jameis-winston-files-counterclaim-denies-raped-woman-061100592--spt.html

Quote:

Kinsman, a former FSU student, claims she was drunk at a Tallahassee bar in December 2012 when Winston and others took her to an apartment, where she says the quarterback raped her. Winston has repeatedly denied the allegations and said the two had consensual sex. Prosecutors have declined to charge Winston and FSU cleared him of any wrongdoing in a two-day student conduct hearing.

She says they took her to an apartment and he raped her, he says it was consensual.

Quote:

Winston's filing repeatedly refers to Kinsman's claims as "lies," saying the encounter between the two was proven by medical evidence and two teammate witnesses to be nothing more than consensual. It says Kinsman chose to leave the bar and didn't object in the taxi ride to the apartment, or when the two got out, and that she later rode on Winston's scooter with her arms around his waist, then hugging him before she walked to her dorm. She did not dial 911, nor call or text family or friends to tell them what happened, the filing said.

1.  I don't think Kinsman choosing to leave the bar and not objecting in the taxi ride to the apartment has any bearing on what happened... she went to the apartment willingly.. so what??

2.  I can see how a medical exam could determine if there was resistance, but usually you hear about medical exams proving there was rape, not the opposite.

3.  The two teammate being a witness is kind of silly.. like they are going to come out and say oh yeah he raped her and we waited outside??

Now, the part that really makes her look bad is the part (if true) that she was seen riding on his scooter and hugging him before walking into the dorm.. Not calling 911 is not a big deal as there is a great deal of shame in rape and a lot of times the victims don't feel comfortable exposing themselves... Also, it is not really natural for someone to text family and friends and say, hey by the way, I went out to have a good time and I was fooling around with this guy and he raped me..

To me there are many inconsistencies in the stories being told, but this is not going to end well for one of the two as he has already filed a counter claim.  If she is lying then she will have no issue with lying all the way, i.e. she could easily say hey I rode with him yes, and I was fooling around with him and then I told him to stop several times and he didn't, and I didn't want to make him angry and that is why I hugged him before going into my dorm because he is a big football player and I was scared, but then I cried the rest of the night in my dorm room..

I don't really know who to believe, but it might end up with her getting some money, just not the 7$ M she is looking for.

[dsc123]

Well it is a bumpy start for the NFL top draft pick. [URL=http://news.yahoo.com/jameis-winston-files-counterclaim-denies-raped-woman-061100592--spt.html]http://news.yahoo.com/jameis-winston-files-counterclaim-denies-raped-woman-061100592--spt.html[/URL] She says they took her to an apartment and he raped her, he says it was consensual. 1.  I don't think Kinsman choosing to leave the bar and not objecting in the taxi ride to the apartment has any bearing on what happened... she went to the apartment willingly.. so what??   2.  I can see how a medical exam could determine if there was resistance, but usually you hear about medical exams proving there was rape, not the opposite. 3.  The two teammate being a witness is kind of silly.. like they are going to come out and say oh yeah he raped her and we waited outside?? Now, the part that really makes her look bad is the part (if true) that she was seen riding on his scooter and hugging him before walking into the dorm.. Not calling 911 is not a big deal as there is a great deal of shame in rape and a lot of times the victims don't feel comfortable exposing themselves... Also, it is not really natural for someone to text family and friends and say, hey by the way, I went out to have a good time and I was fooling around with this guy and he raped me.. To me there are many inconsistencies in the stories being told, but this is not going to end well for one of the two as he has already filed a counter claim.  If she is lying then she will have no issue with lying all the way, i.e. she could easily say hey I rode with him yes, and I was fooling around with him and then I told him to stop several times and he didn't, and I didn't want to make him angry and that is why I hugged him before going into my dorm because he is a big football player and I was scared, but then I cried the rest of the night in my dorm room..   I don't really know who to believe, but it might end up with her getting some money, just not the 7$ M she is looking for.

I wouldn't put much stock in the truth of the allegations in Winston's complaint. I don't mean that as a judgment against Winston, just that the goal here is probably public image and/or forcing the girl to settle her claims. But if you're interested in this stuff, you should check out the NYT articles about how the Talahassee police just protect the football players. The police tipped off the AD immediately, so the players knew it was coming before the police spoke with them. One of the witnesses supposedly taped the encounter, then deleted it. The rape kit was never sent out for testing.

[phan52]

I wouldn't put much stock in the truth of the allegations in Winston's complaint. I don't mean that as a judgment against Winston, just that the goal here is probably public image and/or forcing the girl to settle her claims.

But if you're interested in this stuff, you should check out the NYT articles about how the Talahassee police just protect the football players. The police tipped off the AD immediately, so the players knew it was coming before the police spoke with them. One of the witnesses supposedly taped the encounter, then deleted it. The rape kit was never sent out for testing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/us/florida-state-football-casts-shadow-over-tallahassee-justice.html

Long story, but enlightening.

[Gunther]

As you say, this isn't a court of law; hence, the evidence doesn't have to prove guilt. The league can do what it wants here and as Cuban stated, it won't be Goodell determining it, it'll be the vocal owners. I think Kraft is well-liked and respected by his peers so I don't think a lot will come of it but there will be something. Any non-biased person can determine Brady lied, that in itself is enough for a suspension, probably 4 games if I were a betting man.

4 games it is.

[dsc123]

4 games, a 1st and a 4th, and 1m. Surprised belicheat got out clean, not because he had don't wrong but under the should have known rationale that got Payton. Overall seems about right to me.

[newtogolf]

4 games, a 1st and a 4th, and 1m. Surprised belicheat got out clean, not because he had don't wrong but under the should have known rationale that got Payton.

Overall seems about right to me.

I figured the $1M fine and forfeit of #1 pick but didn't think they'd make them forfeit the 4th and suspend Brady for 4 games.  I'll be pretty shocked if that doesn't get reduced to 2 games after appeal.

[Abu3baid]

Someone just sent me this on whatsapp

[dsc123]

The guys on TV are saying it would have been a fine or 1 game had the Patriots not obstructed the investigation.

[newtogolf]

Someone just sent me this on whatsapp

The Pats would've been better off admitting their staff tampered with the balls and agree to handle the incident internally.  They might have been fined or lost a draft pick but I doubt the penalty would be as severe as it is.

Instead they lied to the NFL, claimed no wrong doing and rolled the dice hoping the investigation wouldn't turn up sufficient proof to conclude they cheated.  It was a calculated risk and it blew up in their faces.   Not only is their Super Bowl win tarnished, but next season as at risk due to loss of Brady for 4 games and loss of 1st and 4th round draft picks could impact future seasons

[Golfingdad]

The Pats would've been better off admitting their staff tampered with the balls and agree to handle the incident internally.  They might have been fined or lost a draft pick but I doubt the penalty would be as severe as it is.

Instead they lied to the NFL, claimed no wrong doing and rolled the dice hoping the investigation wouldn't turn up sufficient proof to conclude they cheated.  It was a calculated risk and it blew up in their faces.   Not only is their Super Bowl win tarnished, but next season as at risk due to loss of Brady for 4 games and loss of 1st and 4th round draft picks could impact future seasons

I'm with you on most of this ... but disagree on the bold.

[newtogolf]

I'm with you on most of this ... but disagree on the bold.

I can see that, but if you go back to the Ravens game when the Pats were first accused by the Raven for using under inflated balls it makes more sense.  The Pats were behind the entire game, Brady was rattled and they were losing at half time 28-14.  I haven't seen any content that states when the deflated balls were noticed by the Ravens defense but if the Pats don't beat the Ravens in that game (35-31), then they don't make it to the Championship game or win the Super Bowl.

[phan52]

I can see that, but if you go back to the Ravens game when the Pats were first accused by the Raven for using under inflated balls it makes more sense.  The Pats were behind the entire game, Brady was rattled and they were losing at half time 28-14.  I haven't seen any content that states when the deflated balls were noticed by the Ravens defense but if the Pats don't beat the Ravens in that game (35-31), then they don't make it to the Championship game or win the Super Bowl.

Exactly. They didn't just start doing that for the Colts game. And then they arrogantly stonewalled and figured that it was not an offense that would be pursued to the degree that it was. The league went a little overboard, IMO, but it is probably a result of the Pats response.

[dsc123]

McNally referred to himself as the deflator in may 2014. That seems to suggest this went on all year, and possibly longer. Would they have made the playoffs and then won the super bowl without deflated balls? Maybe. Would Barry Bonds be the all time home run hitter if he didn't juice? maybe. We will never know because they cheated.