OT: Brady's Freed

[Huskies Rule]

Berman's ruling was based on the PROCEDURAL DEFECTS he identified. PERIOD. I think he left the door wide open on appeal. Several of his comments I find inappropriate and some may question his impartiality, particularly comments attributed to him prior to the hearing and ruling. I wouldn't want to plead my case before a judge who made such public statements. I will offer no thoughts on his impartiality, but I do know personally of his love to expeditiously dispose of cases, attorneys suggesting that a fast resolution trumps [mod edit] almost everything else for Judge Berman. And little is more expeditious than dismissing 'charges' on procedural improprieties (by DA, prosecutor, law enforcement, investigators, et al). Bing, bang, boom...case over.

 

[ochoopsfan]

Tom Brady fears these 5 words:

THE NEW YORK FOOTBALL GIANTS

 

[toadfoot]

I'll be fleeing to WitSec after these comments... but A-Roid Rodriguez, Lance Armstrong, Ben Johnson, Bonds and McGwire, The 1919 Black Sox, the 2000 Spanish Paralympic teams, Rosie Ruiz, Shady Brady and Beli-Cheat- they are all birds of a feather. Based upon how beloved an athlete is or how devoted people may become to a particular sports team, people will believe what they choose to believe, willing to ignore even the most reasonable of inferences while demanding only direct evidence, which is often not possible but doesn't mean the charged is any less guilty.

I think this pretty much establishes your ability to examine the facts impartially.

[QUOTEPeople have been convicted of serious crimes based upon far less circumstantial evidence than was presented by Wells and the NFL. [/QUOTE]

While it's undeniably true that people have been convicted of serious crimes with virtually NO evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, (see Little Rascals Day Care Center case) what I find most troubling about posts like yours, and you're not alone, is that you make the claim there was circumstantial evidence, but you never say what you believe that evidence was. Someone suspicious of your impartiality, which I think we've already established, could reasonably conclude that your circumstantial evidence wouldn't stand up to scrutiny.
I would really be interested in knowing what you've read about this case. Is it just ESPN stories, the Wells Report, Goodell's appeal summary, what? I've read all of them as well as the AEI report, the Patriots' rebuttal, the Carnegie Mellon study and Drew Fustin's analysis along with a few others that I don't recall. By the way the most compelling is Fustin's study which shows almost to a dead certainty that nothing but weather happened. The following is an example from the Wells report of what most people thought was circumstantial evidence:
09:05:45 EDT
McNally: Tom sucks… I’m going make that next ball a duckin balloon.

09:07:08 EDT
Jastremski: Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done.

09:07:37 EDT
Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though...

09:08:07 EDT
Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn... The refs ducked us... a few of then were at almost 16.

09:08:29 EDT
Jastremski: They didn’t recheck then after they put air in them.

09:16:31 EDT
McNally: duck tom… 16 is nothing… Wait till next Sunday

09:16:52 EDT
Jastremski: Omg! Spaz.

From the very beginning it was claimed by Wells and others that the individual referred to in the second message was a reference to Brady concerning a scheme to deflate balls. As an aside, when questioned about this exchange Brady said he didn't believe they were talking about him. We now know that Wells or someone else connected with the investigation (fair to guess given recent events that it was Pash) deliberately edited this message trail, leaving out the following, which occurred after the first message:
09:06:11 EDT
Jastremski: LOL. Hey so when are you going to have that camera set up for Bears practice?

09:06:25 EDT
McNally: Aw hell. Now Belichick is whining, too?

09:06:35 EDT
Jastremski: Sorrrry : )

09:06:57 EDT
McNally: Well you tell that goon that I used the rest of the tape on the Jets last week. Gotta few more extra rolls, but I need to delete some old footage first.

When the entire text message exchange is read it's clear the "he" was Belichick, not Brady and the topic was cameras not footballs, but let's not let a little detail like honesty cloud the narrative that they were discussing deflating footballs.

Just a last word about Fustin's analysis and the football protocol for the coming season. One of the main conclusions in Fustin's study is that Anderson's recollection about which gauge he used prior to kickoff must have been correct, otherwise none of the other measurements make sense and if Anderson used the logo gauge, absolutely nothing happened except weather. To my knowledge, no one has been able to refute a single conclusion from his study or his methodology. As for this season's random testing, I would have preferred a comprehensive and systematic testing at every game by independent testers, but I'm hopeful that even the limited random testing will eventually demonstrate that no tampering occurred and that the deflation was entirely due to weather. If not I'm prepared to eat crow, but if I'm right (I am) then I hope people like you, j66kicker and others are prepared to provide your mea culpas.

 

[Icebear]

Tom Brady fears these 5 words:

THE NEW YORK FOOTBALL GIANTS

Sadly, no one else in the NFL does.

 

[toadfoot]

Berman's ruling was based on the PROCEDURAL DEFECTS he identified. PERIOD. I think he left the door wide open on appeal. Several of his comments I find inappropriate and some may question his impartiality, particularly comments attributed to him prior to the hearing and ruling. I wouldn't want to plead my case before a judge who made such public statements. I will offer no thoughts on his impartiality, but I do know personally of his love to expeditiously dispose of cases, attorneys suggesting that a fast resolution trumps almost everything else for Judge Berman. And little is more expeditious than dismissing 'charges' on procedural improprieties (by DA, prosecutor, law enforcement, investigators, et al). Bing, bang, boom...case over.

Poppycock. The "procedural defects" that you seem to want to dismiss were violations of the Federal Arbitration Act. In order to be reversed the 2nd Circuit will need to find reversible error. Not gonna happen.

 

[Huskies Rule]

 

[toadfoot]

That all you got, Photoshop. Hahahahaha.

 

[UcMiami]

That all you got, Photoshop. Hahahahaha.

Its better than what the NFL got! Bumble, stumble, blah, blah, blah!

I total agree with your points re coming testing of balls at half time, but suspect the NFL will not be publicizing those measurements as it will make them look even stupider than they do already.

Personally I would like to see Kraft hire MIT and a outside security team to set up four game prepared balls at each winter game at Gillette with a pressure meter hooked into the scoreboard - set the balls at 12.5 PSI indoors and then move them to a field level platform for display through the first half with the scoreboard lighting up as each drops below 12 PSI, and then 11.5 PSI - if it is a cold game they could actually get down to below 10 PSI.

 

[calpedaler]

 

[toadfoot]

Its better than what the NFL got! Bumble, stumble, blah, blah, blah!

I total agree with your points re coming testing of balls at half time, but suspect the NFL will not be publicizing those measurements as it will make them look even stupider than they do already.

Personally I would like to see Kraft hire MIT and a outside security team to set up four game prepared balls at each winter game at Gillette with a pressure meter hooked into the scoreboard - set the balls at 12.5 PSI indoors and then move them to a field level platform for display through the first half with the scoreboard lighting up as each drops below 12 PSI, and then 11.5 PSI - if it is a cold game they could actually get down to below 10 PSI.

Awesome idea! Games on ESPN would be especially entertaining as each time the cameras showed the scoreboard fans all across the country would be reminded of ESPN's despicable behavior in this entire episode. Plus there would be the obvious fun of rubbing it in Goodell's face.

 

[meyers7]

I'll be fleeing to WitSec after these comments... but A-Roid Rodriguez, Lance Armstrong, Ben Johnson, Bonds and McGwire, The 1919 Black Sox, the 2000 Spanish Paralympic teams, Rosie Ruiz, Shady Brady and Beli-Cheat- they are all birds of a feather. Based upon how beloved an athlete is or how devoted people may become to a particular sports team, people will believe what they choose to believe, willing to ignore even the most reasonable of inferences while demanding only direct evidence, which is often not possible but doesn't mean the charged is any less guilty.

People have been convicted of serious crimes based upon far less circumstantial evidence than was presented by Wells and the NFL. It is critical to note that Judge Berman only dismissed the NFL's case (and Brady's punishment) on procedural grounds, not evidentiary. Judge Berman's decision was strictly (and lawfully) based upon his finding that Brady, in Berman's opinion, had been denied due process. To wit:
1) the inadequate notice to Brady of his discipline and alleged misconduct,
2) the denial of Brady to examine lead investigator Jeff Pash, and
3) the denial of equal access to investigative files.

Brady's NFL punishment was rejected by Judge Berman because he deemed the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to have been violated. ANY evidence of cheating by Brady or New England Patriot employees, whether the result of evidence- circumstantial or direct- was NEVER considered by this court and this judge.

Don't get me wrong. We are nothing, if not a nation of laws. ALL defendants must have the absolute right to the safeguards of a fair trial that follows the rules constitutionally provided for all Americans. From John Rowland to Charles Manson to the poorest of the poor. For that reason, and that reason alone, I cannot argue with Judge Berman's decision. However; do not for one moment interpret that to mean Tom Brady is innocent of that which he was charged. He beat the charge and the punishment based upon three legal 'technicalities,' which I do not minimize for they are the bedrock of our justice system. But this is very very different than saying that Tom Brady is innocent of deflating footballs- that allegation has yet to be adjudicated, folks.

 

[j66kicker]

Where is that actual physical evidence of this? (I'm not reading that book--it doesn't exactly look credible).

If anyone suspected them of anything, why didn't the other teams change signals etc (hint: they did; and still do)? They could easily see the patriots guy from the sideline. It's not like anyone was hiding anything (as all the other teams did the same thing).

And if the patriots needed all that 'intelligence' to win, why have they continued to roll through the NFL since then? Even with the advent of radios in helmets.

Here's a condensed version of several of the pertinent points in the book (but not the statistical analysis) from the upcoming Sept 28 ESPN The Magazine. Article was published today by ESPN.com. (Not that ESPN makes the content any more credible - they had Roger Goodell as a guest on the Mike & Mike show this morning without giving him any advance notice they were releasing this highly-unflattering story at the same time.)

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/ot-espn-in-depth-article-on-deflategate-with-roots-in-spygate.80244/

 

[toadfoot]

Here's a condensed version of several of the pertinent points in the book (but not the statistical analysis) from the upcoming Sept 28 ESPN The Magazine. Article was published today by ESPN.com. (Not that ESPN makes the content any more credible - they had Roger Goodell as a guest on the Mike & Mike show this morning without giving him any advance notice they were releasing this highly-unflattering story at the same time.)

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/ot-espn-in-depth-article-on-deflategate-with-roots-in-spygate.80244/

You must have come to the Spygate party late. There's next to nothing new in either ESPN's or SI's articles. More anonymous sources making unsubstantiated allegations with virtually no evidence. Both still want to imply that video taping of signals is somehow against the rules despite the fact that it isn't and never has been.

 

[j66kicker]

You must have come to the Spygate party late. There's next to nothing new in either ESPN's or SI's articles. More anonymous sources making unsubstantiated allegations with virtually no evidence. Both still want to imply that video taping of signals is somehow against the rules despite the fact that it isn't and never has been.

"Condensed version" meant all this stuff had already been reported (in O'Leary's book in this case) years ago.

Regarding the legality of video taping signals:

"In 2006....NFL senior vice president for football operations Ray Anderson issued a memo reminding teams that “video taping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent’s offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches’ booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.”

 

[CL82]

People have been convicted of serious crimes based upon far less circumstantial evidence than was presented by Wells and the NFL.

No, they haven't.

 

[toadfoot]

"Condensed version" meant all this stuff had already been reported (in O'Leary's book in this case) years ago.

Regarding the legality of video taping signals:

"In 2006....NFL senior vice president for football operations Ray Anderson issued a memo reminding teams that “video taping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent’s offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches’ booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game.”

And here's where ALL the confusion begins. Anderson's memo actually misstates the rule book. The rule book doesn't say that filming is prohibited from the sidelines, nor does it say anything about other locations accessible to club staff etc. Anderson made that up and he had no authority to modify the rules governing filming.

The rule book does say filming can't be done from the "field" and the field throughout the rule book is generally defined as the area between the sidelines and the endlines. In other words, you can't place your videographer in the end zone or on the field of play. You can argue that Belichick took advantage of a badly worded memo meant to clarify the rules (and did the exact opposite), but that's about it.

Finally, video taping of signals is NOT illegal and nothing in Anderson's memo says that. What the memo says is that video taping signals from "certain locations" is prohibited and as I pointed out above, his memo includes prohibitions that are simply not in the rule book. There is no rule against video taping of opponents signals, period, end of story. I have challenged others in the past to prove me wrong and I'm still waiting. No such rule exists or has ever existed.

 

[billnaples]

Here's a condensed version of several of the pertinent points in the book (but not the statistical analysis) from the upcoming Sept 28 ESPN The Magazine. Article was published today by ESPN.com. (Not that ESPN makes the content any more credible - they had Roger Goodell as a guest on the Mike & Mike show this morning without giving him any advance notice they were releasing this highly-unflattering story at the same time.)

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/ot-espn-in-depth-article-on-deflategate-with-roots-in-spygate.80244/

I like to clear the air before posting Patriot/Brady vs. NFL/Goodell opinions. I began rooting for the NY Giants probably 15 years before the then AFL Boston Patriots were born. So spare me that battle.

The haters are going to hate and those who have no ability to examine reports and see them for what they are are forever going to claim cheating. They are going to drink the Goodell Kool Aid about a number of items the NFL thinks will support them in the appeal. And I damn near peed my pants laughing this morning when he quoted the Wells report as being an independent search for facts. A report he admitted to Judge Berman was not necessarily independent or factually correct but it didn't have to be since he had the power to ignore the real world of legal fairness.

I am no legal scholar (okay, not a scholar at all) but I think eventually the 2nd Circuit will affirm the judges rejection of the NFL position because of the reality of the denial of reasonable access to reports and findings and a cross of Counsel who edited the Wells Report (Pash). All Roger said this morning was a replay of his weak presentation he made to the judge. And the judge gaveled down hard on the NFL/

 

[toadfoot]

I like to clear the air before posting Patriot/Brady vs. NFL/Goodell opinions. I began rooting for the NY Giants probably 15 years before the then AFL Boston Patriots were born. So spare me that battle.

I am no legal scholar (okay, not a scholar at all) but I think eventually the 2nd Circuit will affirm the judges rejection of the NFL position because of the reality of the denial of reasonable access to reports and findings and a cross of Counsel who edited the Wells Report (Pash). All Roger said this morning was a replay of his weak presentation he made to the judge. And the judge gaveled down hard on the NFL/

Agree. The people claiming this will be overturned by the 2nd Circuit because Berman didn't give deference to the CBA, is an activist judge, etc., are seeing this through the prism of their own hatred and jealousy of the Patriots. While no lawyer, I know enough to understand that the 2nd Circuit doesn't even have to completely agree with Berman to uphold his decision on appeal. In order to overturn they must find reversible error. Appellate courts give the original "trier of fact" a great deal of deference when it comes to assessing the evidence and rarely overturn based on the original judges evidentiary finding.

 

[Deadrody]

The stats analysis of the Pats home performance against the spread during the Belichick years up to when the book was written was more than an "outlier" - it was so statistically unlikely it's basically "impossible" for it to be random. The LV spread takes into account home field advantage, and eventually catches up to a larger-than-normal home field advantage, but not this one. (BTW Seattle is also known to have a greater-than normal home field advantage with the decibel level produced by their crowd and the stadium architecture.)

Regarding Cassel, O'Leary notes that he was excellent filling in for Brady in the Pats' system in 2008. But as a starter in Kansas City after that his completion % AND yards per completion dropped way off. He also notes coaches who did well as assistants at NE, but bombed as head coaches after they moved on (Josh McDaniels, Charlie Weiss). And if any of these guys were in on any cheating, why would they admit it afterward and implicate themselves?

None of this is "evidence, just observations. But, even as a Patriots fan, I thought there was a large body of interesting observations.

Nonsense. What it is, is the kind of brain dead stupidity that is common with all conspiracy theories. The idea, for instance, that the minimal level of cheating alleged here could have made Cassell awesome in one season in New England, but stink ever since is laughably stupid.

Ideas like those are an insult to the professional athletes in the NFL, basically chalking up the difference between winning and losing to knowing some of the other team's signals.

I'll give you an example. Assume you could positively steal every sign - from the Yankee's catcher with Mariano Rivera on the mound. You know his cutter is coming (which you basically did know). Doesn't matter. You still couldn't hit it. And even if you did, you broke your bat and hit a weak ground ball to short.

That's how elite level professional athletics works. All the hate on the Patriots is nothing more than petty jealousy. Because the Patriots are just run that much better than most other teams. The idea that they might bend the rules on top of already being better than your team ? Just too much, I guess.

 

[intlzncster]

Ideas like those are an insult to the professional athletes in the NFL, basically chalking up the difference between winning and losing to knowing some of the other team's signals.

I'll give you an example. Assume you could positively steal every sign - from the Yankee's catcher with Mariano Rivera on the mound. You know his cutter is coming (which you basically did know). Doesn't matter. You still couldn't hit it. And even if you did, you broke your bat and hit a weak ground ball to short.

Richard Sherman agrees with this sentiment completely:

"Everybody does their things a little differently, but at the end of the day, it's handled between the lines," Sherman said. "And if they man up and they beat you straight up, they beat you straight up. You can say they knew your plays or they watched this or they watched that, but a lot of times if you watch film good enough, you find good indicators. You find things. So if you're studying the game the right way, you go out there understanding what plays are coming, and you know when the plays are coming. But can you execute? Can 11 guys stop the other 11 from executing their play?

"And at the end of the day, that's what it's about. You can say you stole scripts or whatever it is, but they still have to win the game. They still have to intercept the ball. They still have to execute. Eleven guys have to execute at the same time. And that's what they did, so give them credit. If there's hanky-panky going on, they've gotten away with it.

 

[j66kicker]

Nonsense. What it is, is the kind of brain dead stupidity that is common with all conspiracy theories. The idea, for instance, that the minimal level of cheating alleged here could have made Cassell awesome in one season in New England, but stink ever since is laughably stupid.

Ideas like those are an insult to the professional athletes in the NFL, basically chalking up the difference between winning and losing to knowing some of the other team's signals.

I'll give you an example. Assume you could positively steal every sign - from the Yankee's catcher with Mariano Rivera on the mound. You know his cutter is coming (which you basically did know). Doesn't matter. You still couldn't hit it. And even if you did, you broke your bat and hit a weak ground ball to short.

That's how elite level professional athletics works. All the hate on the Patriots is nothing more than petty jealousy. Because the Patriots are just run that much better than most other teams. The idea that they might bend the rules on top of already being better than your team ? Just too much, I guess.

I agree you still have to execute. Willie McGinest said yesterday (re. the recent ESPN 'report'), "If all that stuff was true we would have won 5 Super Bowls." (They won 3 while he was a Patriot). Apparently he feels it would have provided an advantage.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...-would-have-5-super-bowl-titles-if-we-cheated

 

[ed4ourgirls]

Looks like it's going to be soggy in Foxborough tonight. The balls will be slippery.

Steelers may want to knock 'em down a few psi.

 

[intlzncster]

Looks like it's going to be soggy in Foxborough tonight. The balls will be slippery.

Steelers may want to knock 'em down a few psi.

ESPN Breaking News tomorrow: Patriots accused attempting to alter the play of the field, by keeping it too dry during rain storms. The Steelers only brought extra long cleats, and as a result, had a difficult time with footing. Five draft picks and jail time for Tom Brady.

 

[billnaples]

Berman's ruling was based on the PROCEDURAL DEFECTS he identified. PERIOD. I think he left the door wide open on appeal. Several of his comments I find inappropriate and some may question his impartiality, particularly comments attributed to him prior to the hearing and ruling. I wouldn't want to plead my case before a judge who made such public statements. I will offer no thoughts on his impartiality, but I do know personally of his love to expeditiously dispose of cases, attorneys suggesting that a fast resolution trumps [mod edit] almost everything else for Judge Berman. And little is more expeditious than dismissing 'charges' on procedural improprieties (by DA, prosecutor, law enforcement, investigators, et al). Bing, bang, boom...case over.

I agree that his ruling was on the failure of the NFL to conduct this case in a fair manner. I just reread his decision. I am not a legal scholar but I fail to see what doors he left open ffor the NFL to have a successful appeal. Every reason he gave for his decision seemed to me to have been supported by cites of previous cases. As to impartiality I saw no remarks attributed to Berman outside of the inquiries he made in open court. It seemed to everyone except the legal scholars that he was trying to make a point to the NFL that based on his review of the record they should try to settle. In Goodell's arrogance he was not going to lose, the CBA was undeniable in giving him abusive powers. The only difference is that had this been a criminal proceeding I would have expected the "dismissal" to have been with prejudice precluding another prosecution (or in this case a persecution).

 

[01Neaggrad02]

OJ was freed and still guilty as sin....