OT: Jim Kelly Doesn't Believe Buddy Brady

[RockyMTblue2]

And some say Ditto for Belichick

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...hick-never-believed-brady-on-deflation-issue/

I offer these tid bits to aide the demise of the Tenn talk around here!

 

[reno tony]

And some say Ditto for Belichick

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...hick-never-believed-brady-on-deflation-issue/

I offer these tid bits to aide the demise of the Tenn talk around here!

I do have a question for you about Brady.... do you think he would like to see the TENN series start up again?

 

[upstater]

Jim Kelly does not have a good rep in Buffalo among a slew of people. As a transplant to this area, I never knew a thing about what he did, but apparently, he has declared bankruptcy twice up here and stiffed a lot of people for huge bills, while maintaining his luxury lifestyle. He wouldn't be the first, but in terms of business, he was taking goods from people while keeping his financial situation under wraps.

He is the last person who should be talking, especially when it comes to something so minor.

Try to blow holes through this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...2c8d2c-ffd4-11e4-805c-c3f407e5a9e9_story.html

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Jim Kelly does not have a good rep in Buffalo among a slew of people. As a transplant to this area, I never knew a thing about what he did, but apparently, he has declared bankruptcy twice up here and stiffed a lot of people for huge bills, while maintaining his luxury lifestyle. He wouldn't be the first, but in terms of business, he was taking goods from people while keeping his financial situation under wraps.

He is the last person who should be talking, especially when it comes to something so minor.

Try to blow holes through this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...2c8d2c-ffd4-11e4-805c-c3f407e5a9e9_story.html

Shooting the messenger is an old dodge but heck Brady has a lot of Q'backs standing up for him ... oops, no.

 

[upstater]

Shooting the messenger is an old dodge but heck Brady has a lot of Q'backs standing up for him ... oops, no.

OK, as long as you like dishonest people.

I can only say I agree 100% with the Washington Post reporter.

 

[Orangutan]

Jim Kelly does not have a good rep in Buffalo among a slew of people. As a transplant to this area, I never knew a thing about what he did, but apparently, he has declared bankruptcy twice up here and stiffed a lot of people for huge bills, while maintaining his luxury lifestyle. He wouldn't be the first, but in terms of business, he was taking goods from people while keeping his financial situation under wraps.

Do you have a source beyond hearsay? As a public figure, if he had declared bankruptcy it would be all over the news and I can find nothing about it online. I'm a lifelong Bills fan and I've certainly never heard anything about it.

EDIT: Looks like he had a lawsuit filed against his company in the 90s because they weren't paying bills, related to a failed restaurant venture. So the stiffing people for bills has happened, apparently.

 

[UcMiami]

What I love is all these QBs say of course they can tell the difference, but if you asked any one of them before deflate gate if the footballs at the end of the half of a game felt any different from the first series they would have said no, and been wrong.

QBs never in a game compare two footballs - very different from having two footballs and being told one is under inflated. If you had two identically inflated they would still choose one definitively I bet.

 

[Carnac]

In my humble opinion.....I don't believe any ball boy (or any equipment assistant tasked with the responsibility of maintaining control over game footballs would alter in any way said footballs WITHOUT being told or directed to do so by someone above them in the organization [i.e. equipment manager, one of the coaches, the starting QB, etc.] .

I don't for one second believe that there is a ball boy employed by any one of the 32 NFL teams, has that kind of cachet, to just arbitrarily adjust the air pressure in any of the footballs because he thinks it's a good idea. Especially AFTER they have been screened by the referees. No one with a scintilla of common sense believes that.

If I'm one of two suspended equipment personnel people, they can throw me under the bus publically, as they need a scapegoat (in a case like this, that is understood. Somebody in the organization has got to that the hit). BUT.........if I acted on orders....I'd better be getting my FULL pay (under the table), and them some or......I'm going to the NFL league office in NY, and have a a face to face meeting with the commissioner, and I'm going to sing like a canary.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but do find it - the whole dynamic - fascinating and no facet more interesting than fan reaction. Patriot fans die hard for their QB; meanwhile his poll rating have plummeted him down to the bottom tier. Meanwhile, Belichick and the Pats are -Belichick from the git go - are steering clear. Personally, I'd like the NFL to put some broad parameters on football "prep", so both teams can play with what they want without turning it into nerf ball!

 

[upstater]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but do find it - the whole dynamic - fascinating and no facet more interesting than fan reaction. Patriot fans die hard for their QB; meanwhile his poll rating have plummeted him down to the bottom tier. Meanwhile, Belichick and the Pats are -Belichick from the git go - are steering clear. Personally, I'd like the NFL to put some broad parameters on football "prep", so both teams can play with what they want without turning it into nerf ball!

You put too much faith in Ron Borges. He absolutely despises Belichick.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

You put too much faith in Ron Borges. He absolutely despises Belichick.

What faith? Belichick's first public statement - I don't know anything or involve myself in that stuff, ask the QB.

 

[CL82]

In my humble opinion.....I don't believe any ball boy (or any equipment assistant tasked with the responsibility of maintaining control over game footballs would alter in any way said footballs WITHOUT being told or directed to do so by someone above them in the organization [i.e. equipment manager, one of the coaches, the starting QB, etc.] .

I don't for one second believe that there is a ball boy employed by any one of the 32 NFL teams, has that kind of cachet, to just arbitrarily adjust the air pressure in any of the footballs because he thinks it's a good idea. Especially AFTER they have been screened by the referees. No one with a scintilla of common sense believes that.

Of course that assumes that a ball boy actually deflated a ball, and the report seems to indicate just the opposite.

In my humble opinion, if a ball loses air pressure within the limits that predicted by physics, as is duly noted in the Wells report, it makes no sense to construct an elaborate conspiracy to explain the air pressure loss.

 

[willtalk]

CL82- Not long ago I read some lawyers take on if either the Pats or Brady had a case to appeal. He also dealt with the issue of the air pressure that you just brought up in detail. While I neither have the patience, memory or writing skill to reconstruct his argument I will say he convinced me that they had no case for appeal because the burden of proof reverts to the individual that is appealing. Brady particularly since he did not co-operate would have a hard time challenging the results of the ruling. This lawyer also explained and broke down each bit of information on the air pressure issue which cleared up the confusion. Either you did not read and absorb the entire report in respect to that issue or you just couldn't understand it. The information in no way supports the conclusion that you seem to have reached. If you come to the conclusion that it makes no sense, either the people who concluded the Wells report are idiots or you just didn't understand it. If they were idiots the Pats would certainly have a case and would certainly have challenged the ruling.

 

[CL82]

CL82- Not long ago I read some lawyers take on if either the Pats or Brady had a case to appeal. He also dealt with the issue of the air pressure that you just brought up in detail. While I neither have the patience, memory or writing skill to reconstruct his argument I will say he convinced me that they had no case for appeal because the burden of proof reverts to the individual that is appealing. Brady particularly since he did not co-operate would have a hard time challenging the results of the ruling. This lawyer also explained and broke down each bit of information on the air pressure issue which cleared up the confusion. Either you did not read and absorb the entire report in respect to that issue or you just couldn't understand it. The information in no way supports the conclusion that you seem to have reached. If you come to the conclusion that it makes no sense, either the people who concluded the Wells report are idiots or you just didn't understand it. If they were idiots the Pats would certainly have a case and would certainly have challenged the ruling.

Well I wouldn't want to try your patience, so I'll just note that it is kind of fundamental that when you lack the ability to explain something, you really don't understand it. You'll have to forgive me if I don't find the "well, I really don't remember what was said, and really couldn't explain it even if I did, but hey trust me it would make you complete abandon the clear science described in the report in favor of a tortured conspiracy theory" line of reasoning particularly compelling. But what the hey, if you can actually dig up a link, I'll try to muddle through it despite my obviously limited intellect.

 

[UcMiami]

CL82- Not long ago I read some lawyers take on if either the Pats or Brady had a case to appeal. He also dealt with the issue of the air pressure that you just brought up in detail. While I neither have the patience, memory or writing skill to reconstruct his argument I will say he convinced me that they had no case for appeal because the burden of proof reverts to the individual that is appealing. Brady particularly since he did not co-operate would have a hard time challenging the results of the ruling. This lawyer also explained and broke down each bit of information on the air pressure issue which cleared up the confusion. Either you did not read and absorb the entire report in respect to that issue or you just couldn't understand it. The information in no way supports the conclusion that you seem to have reached. If you come to the conclusion that it makes no sense, either the people who concluded the Wells report are idiots or you just didn't understand it. If they were idiots the Pats would certainly have a case and would certainly have challenged the ruling.

This is like saying ... I'll take the Tobacco Industry's well reasoned and cogent argument that smoking is not addictive and does not cause cancer as fact because they presented their case and then their chairman judged it to be true and balanced.
The NFL hired an investigator and paid him a lot of money to 'investigate' - if he came back and said, nothing here, here, it would be hard to justify the millions of dollars he charged the next time they needed an investigation. And he goes out and hires a scientific firm who has previously PROVED that second hand smoke is safe, and that asbestos does not cause cancer, to prove that the balls were manipulated.
Or like having the police investigate the shooting of an unarmed man by a police officer and being surprised that they come back with a 'justified' shooting.
Or trusting that the prosecutors in a criminal case have presented all the facts and the correct conclusions from those facts so there really is no need to bother with the defense presenting its case since we know everything already - just jump to ruling and penalty phase.

As for the popularity of TB - stupidest statistics around - orchestrate a smear campaign for 4 months and then be surprised that the public perception is negatively impacted. And it was orchestrated by selective leaks of false data from the league office, that they then refused to correct for 4 months. And not just leaks, but an official letter from the league office to the Patriots that included false inflation data.

 

[willtalk]

Well I wouldn't want to try your patience, so I'll just note that it is kind of fundamental that when you lack the ability to explain something, you really don't understand it. You'll have to forgive me if I don't find the "well, I really don't remember what was said, and really couldn't explain it even if I did, but hey trust me it would make you complete abandon the clear science described in the report in favor of a tortured conspiracy theory" line of reasoning particularly compelling. But what the hey, if you can actually dig up a link, I'll try to muddle through it despite my obviously limited intellect.

It isn't that I don't remember what was said. It's that the statistical information that was used in the report was listed along with the rational for the conclusion using those statistics. With out the actual numbers the rational is so much wind. That is my point. I have often heard the same argument that was presented here, but sans any connection or proof for that argument. The information that was displayed came to an entirely different conclusion than the one presented here. The thread and forum was in the comment section of a Grant Cohen article in the SF Press Democrat. It was some time ago and frankly I don't think I could find if even if I had the desire to do so.

Now to require me to supply the article or give a detailed explanation while others don't provide anything but their own personal conclusions is hypocritical. My point is that it is easy to make assertions if we are allowed to cherry pick the information that supports our claims. I am not accusing the posters here of doing so deliberately. I don't think that is true, Rather they just are coming to their conclusions based on partial information that has been presented through other sources. The reason the guy on the " Press Dem." posted was in response to the same arguments that were presented here. Let me say that there were no more posts on the subject after his. The fact that the Patriots have accepted their penalty seems to support the fact that they have no case in respect to challenging the inflation issue.

Whether Brady was involved is a separate issue. It appears that Brady is challenging his suspension. As the individual challenging the ruling the burden is now on him to prove the committee came to a wrong conclusion based on the available evidence. This lawyer added that Brady would have a hard time making a case due to non-compliance in supplying the information that he was ask for.

I would add that I have seen many posts in forums and read quite a few articles that made assertions on both ends of this issue. This guys post was , in my personal opinion, the most rational, detailed and helped to clear up the confusion that most other sources seemed to only make worse.

 

[CL82]

It isn't that I don't remember what was said. It's that the statistical information that was used in the report was listed along with the rational for the conclusion using those statistics. With out the actual numbers the rational is so much wind. That is my point. I have often heard the same argument that was presented here, but sans any connection or proof for that argument. The information that was displayed came to an entirely different conclusion than the one presented here. The thread and forum was in the comment section of a Grant Cohen article in the SF Press Democrat. It was some time ago and frankly I don't think I could find if even if I had the desire to do so.

Now to require me to supply the article or give a detailed explanation while others don't provide anything but their own personal conclusions is hypocritical. My point is that it is easy to make assertions if we are allowed to cherry pick the information that supports our claims. I am not accusing the posters here of doing so deliberately. I don't think that is true, Rather they just are coming to their conclusions based on partial information that has been presented through other sources. The reason the guy on the " Press Dem." posted was in response to the same arguments that were presented here. Let me say that there were no more posts on the subject after his. The fact that the Patriots have accepted their penalty seems to support the fact that they have no case in respect to challenging the inflation issue.

Whether Brady was involved is a separate issue. It appears that Brady is challenging his suspension. As the individual challenging the ruling the burden is now on him to prove the committee came to a wrong conclusion based on the available evidence. This lawyer added that Brady would have a hard time making a case due to non-compliance in supplying the information that he was ask for.

I would add that I have seen many posts in forums and read quite a few articles that made assertions on both ends of this issue. This guys post was , in my personal opinion, the most rational, detailed and helped to clear up the confusion that most other sources seemed to only make worse.

It sounds like the holy grail of posts: it resolves all the questions and is just as illusive to find.