|
Post by Jim on May 12, 2015 9:23:30 GMT -6
You won't see a wrongful termination suit either. The clowns will be payed plenty of hush money and they are (no doubt) loyalists willing to die for the cause. Good thing for Brady too, I bet the details that would come out of a lawsuit would not cast Tom in a favorable light. Jim Steve: I cut-pasted this from an article about the report, but I think it is accurate, recall that the game occurred on the 18th: "...There was no evidence of phone calls or texts between Brady and Jastremski in the six months prior, but on January 19th, that changed. The report details the following:
Two calls lasting 25 minutes and 2 seconds on January 19th;
Two calls lasting 9 minutes and 55 seconds on January 20th;
Two calls lasting 20 minutes and 52 seconds on January 21st.
That totals 55 minutes and 49 seconds worth of calls between Tom Brady and the equipment assistant, and they ended when Jastremski surrendered his phone on January 21st, for forensic investigation.
What was said? There is no record of that, but the two also met on the 19th and exchanged texts. On that first day after the news broke, the Wells report says that Brady invited Jastremski to the QB room, the only time that has happened in the twenty years Jastremski had been with the team, according to what he told investigators. (There is no indication of how long that meeting took).
Brady also sent texts of “You good Jonny boy?”; “You doing good?” Jastremski responded: “Still nervous; so far so good though” and “FYI…Dave will be picking your brain later about it. He‟s not accusing me, or anyone…trying to get to bottom of it. He knows it‟s unrealistic you did it yourself…”."If I were a Pats fan, I'd be praying that Jastremski never has the opportunity to spill the beantown-beans about what was discussed in those calls or in that once-in-a-lifetime QB room meeting. As noted above, I bet that Jastremski does not sue. He is a loyal soldier. Every sports journalist on earth is going to try to get an interview with him though, and whether or not "the deflator" has the spine to stonewall forever remains to be seen. This is the kind of thing that could get into Tom's head. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 12, 2015 9:38:03 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 12, 2015 14:34:01 GMT -6
Of course this will stick to Brady and the Pats, everyone and their uncle will feel their NFL team got screwed out of an opportunity to be in the Superbowl over the last 14 years. Even fans for teams like the Bills, Cardinals, and................(no I won't say it), will feel that glory was stolen from them.
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 12, 2015 14:44:38 GMT -6
Btw, Garoppolo is a pretty good QB, so I'm not worried about the Pats going 4-0 at the start of next season. The draft pick is no big deal also, I can't get too upset with losing the last pick in the 1st round next year. At best the Patriots have the third or fourth to the last pick. It is a shame that the Pats have some easy games in the first four. I could certainly see them losing the opener against Baltimore though. Jim (Edit - the opener is actually against Pittsburgh. I wonder how Chris Nicholl is enjoying this story! We exchanged emails last year when he and his family visited Colorado.) I think about Chris when the Steelers are mention. I can't forget the pumpkin head he put on Roethlisberger's shoulders after his motorcycle accident.
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 14, 2015 17:46:24 GMT -6
Jim, The Patriots' response: wellsreportcontext.com/I'm expecting the league office to offer an official apology any moment now..........................Okay, I'll give them a couple of hours, but no more. I want the draft pick back even though we don't need it.
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 16, 2015 11:37:47 GMT -6
Jim, Obviously, you can't take time off from your very busy Broncos filled day to respond to the truth according to Kraft. Now, if you were the subject of a Wells investigation, the conclusion would be that you had something to hide and were therefore guilty of something. Stay out of bathrooms, btw, the only reason to enter one is to do something illegal.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 19, 2015 16:45:58 GMT -6
Jim, Obviously, you can't take time off from your very busy Broncos filled day to respond to the truth according to Kraft. Now, if you were the subject of a Wells investigation, the conclusion would be that you had something to hide and were therefore guilty of something. Stay out of bathrooms, btw, the only reason to enter one is to do something illegal. Hi Steve: Speaking of bathrooms, Well, I wouldn't say to an investigator that I pee'd in a urinal for a minute and 40 seconds in a bathroom where the is no urinal. Also, "the deflator" being a weight loss reference? Even you don't believe that BS. Seriously. I see that Kraft backed down today and accepted his team punishment. He is savvy enough to know that any appeal would bring to light facts about Tom's complicity in the cheating and Tom's bald-faced after the fact lying. Expect Brady's appeal to be "resolved" or withdrawn in the next few days. The Patriots can not afford for the truth to be solidified. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 19, 2015 16:55:42 GMT -6
Jim, Obviously, you can't take time off from your very busy Broncos filled day to respond to the truth according to Kraft. Now, if you were the subject of a Wells investigation, the conclusion would be that you had something to hide and were therefore guilty of something. Stay out of bathrooms, btw, the only reason to enter one is to do something illegal. p.s. The funniest posts I've seen on sports pages in ages are those from genuinely brain-dead Pats fans who are routinely saying that "no punishment is justified" because: (A) The NFL did not present conclusive proof that Brady cheated, and (B) no punishment is warranted in view of purely circumstantial evidence. Don't these bean-town rubes know that that Aaron Hernandez gets to spend the rest of his entire brutish life in prison because of circumstantial evidence after a verdict that did not require conclusive proof? Also, there is plenty of direct evidence implicating Brady. You must be embarrassed by the faithful. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 19, 2015 16:56:49 GMT -6
Jim, Obviously, you can't take time off from your very busy Broncos filled day to respond to the truth according to Kraft. Now, if you were the subject of a Wells investigation, the conclusion would be that you had something to hide and were therefore guilty of something. Stay out of bathrooms, btw, the only reason to enter one is to do something illegal. Back room talks? Of course they are. The Pats can't afford any more brushes with the truth. deadspin.com/report-nfl-and-pats-participating-in-back-channel-con-1705421653
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 19, 2015 20:28:39 GMT -6
Jim, Obviously, you can't take time off from your very busy Broncos filled day to respond to the truth according to Kraft. Now, if you were the subject of a Wells investigation, the conclusion would be that you had something to hide and were therefore guilty of something. Stay out of bathrooms, btw, the only reason to enter one is to do something illegal. p.s. The funniest posts I've seen on sports pages in ages are those from genuinely brain-dead Pats fans who are routinely saying that "no punishment is justified" because: (A) The NFL did not present conclusive proof that Brady cheated, and (B) no punishment is warranted in view of purely circumstantial evidence. Don't these bean-town rubes know that that Aaron Hernandez gets to spend the rest of his entire brutish life in prison because of circumstantial evidence after a verdict that did not require conclusive proof? Also, there is plenty of direct evidence implicating Brady. You must be embarrassed by the faithful. Jim Jim, I'm starting to believe you're actually taking the Well Report seriously. I understand the fun you're having busting my ass over this affair, but enough already. If only we could find a way to get hernandez out on weekend furloughs and Brady in the prison yard for practice. Is there an evidence classification in between BS and circumstantial that we might be able to use to get Brady convicted and sent to jail 4 hrs per week? The Wells Report just might be that evidence, but anyone who has spent a couple hours in traffic court could poke holes in that report.
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 19, 2015 20:48:32 GMT -6
Jim, Obviously, you can't take time off from your very busy Broncos filed day to respond to the truth according to Kraft. Now, if you were the subject of a Wells investigation, the conclusion would be that you had something to hide and were therefore guilty of something. Stay out of bathrooms, btw, the only reason to enter one is to do something illegal. Back room talks? Of course they are. The Pats can't afford any more brushes with the truth. deadspin.com/report-nfl-and-pats-participating-in-back-channel-con-1705421653I don't read anything into two guys like Kraft and Goodall making backroom deals. No doubt the fine will become a charitable donation and a write off, and a first round draft choice after winning another SB is not a big deal. I am disappointed with Kraft. The facts are that it's all about business, neither one is considering the truth. It's Brady's appeal that I'm looking forward to. Goodall has a shabby record when confronted by the players union and the truth. Goodall is a proven liar in that regard.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 20, 2015 10:10:22 GMT -6
p.s. The funniest posts I've seen on sports pages in ages are those from genuinely brain-dead Pats fans who are routinely saying that "no punishment is justified" because: (A) The NFL did not present conclusive proof that Brady cheated, and (B) no punishment is warranted in view of purely circumstantial evidence. Don't these bean-town rubes know that that Aaron Hernandez gets to spend the rest of his entire brutish life in prison because of circumstantial evidence after a verdict that did not require conclusive proof? Also, there is plenty of direct evidence implicating Brady. You must be embarrassed by the faithful. Jim Jim, I'm starting to believe you're actually taking the Well Report seriously. I understand the fun you're having busting my ass over this affair, but enough already. If only we could find a way to get hernandez out on weekend furloughs and Brady in the prison yard for practice. Is there an evidence classification in between BS and circumstantial that we might be able to use to get Brady convicted and sent to jail 4 hrs per week? The Wells Report just might be that evidence, but anyone who has spent a couple hours in traffic court could poke holes in that report. Hi Steve: I am enjoying busting your ass and watching Patriot Nation squirm. With respect to the merits of the report, I think it is not reasonably disputable, based upon the direct evidence of the texts and video, that McNally under the direction of Jastemski released air from the balls after they had been certified by the Refs before the AFC championship game. I think it is far more likely than not that Brady was aware of this based upon the texts and his many hours of consultation with Jastremski after the fact. The Patriots rebuttal to the Wells report was a joke - "the deflator is a reference to weight loss...." The Patriots lawyers actually said that, even in the context of all that texted discussion of rugby balls and watermelons. Give me a break! That is a lawyer grasping at straws... I am of course enjoying the fact that cocky Tom "Maybe he should read the rule book" Brady has been proved in the court of public opinion to be a cheater. I don't think he needs to go to jail of course. It would not bother me if his suspension was reduced to two games. I think he is a moron for not nipping this in the bud by publicly coming clean after the game. The report is pretty good given that Wells does not have subpoena power and that Brady refused to cooperate. The fact that one can poke holes in certain parts of it - (and the Pat's lawyers tried to poke holes but kind of made matters worse with their laughable arguments) is in my opinion - irrelevant. I would have judged that McNally and Jastremski cheated by deflating the balls after measurement under any legal standard short of 100% certainty. I would have judged that Brady knew about it under the actual "more likely than not" 51% standard. Goodell can and probably will screw up the NFL's case on appeal. Oh well. I will still be surprised if any additional evidence comes out on appeal because, (obviously) I believe that McNally, Jastremski and Brady can only admit that they were deflating balls or knew that balls were being deflated, if they are honest and/or subjected to vigorous investigation. Brady's refusal to cooperate killed him by the way. This is not a criminal case and the 5th Amendment does not apply. In the public's view, Brady simply can not claim innocence while refusing to turn over the evidence. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 20, 2015 10:30:33 GMT -6
I don't read anything into two guys like Kraft and Goodall making backroom deals. No doubt the fine will become a charitable donation and a write off, and a first round draft choice after winning another SB is not a big deal. I am disappointed with Kraft. The facts are that it's all about business, neither one is considering the truth. It's Brady's appeal that I'm looking forward to. Goodall has a shabby record when confronted by the players union and the truth. Goodall is a proven liar in that regard. Steve, are you positive you won't read something into a possible back room deal, assuming it materializes - I would think you might based on this: "It seems like a wrongful termination suit is inevitable from the two equipment managers. They're already being hit with indefinite suspensions, so it's likely they will be terminated. If they're not terminated then we'll know that Brady had something to do with the deflated balls, or else why keep them on the payroll, if not to continue the cover up. So I'd like to see them terminated and Brady to appeal the decision, or else I'd know that Brady, the organization and the NFL are trying to sweep this affair under the rug."I know that I'm juggling apples and oranges and putting words into your mouth at the same time, but the pieces are in place for McNally and Jastremski to be reinstated given the recent "the NFL forced us to suspend them" story line and any backroom deal resolving the appeal by (for example) reducing the suspension to two games, is going to be interpreted by me and most of the public north, south and west of Boston as "sweeping this affair under the rug." I absolutely do think that any future backroom deal (assuming it happens) is additional evidence the Brady had a lot to do with the deflation. Do you agree? Jim
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 20, 2015 18:30:51 GMT -6
I don't read anything into two guys like Kraft and Goodall making backroom deals. No doubt the fine will become a charitable donation and a write off, and a first round draft choice after winning another SB is not a big deal. I am disappointed with Kraft. The facts are that it's all about business, neither one is considering the truth. It's Brady's appeal that I'm looking forward to. Goodall has shabby record when confronted by the players union and the truth. Goodall is a proven liar in that regard. Steve, are you positive you won't read something into a possible back room deal, assuming it materializes - I would think you might based on this: "It seems like a wrongful termination suit is inevitable from the two equipment managers. They're already being hit with indefinite suspensions, so it's likely they will be terminated. If they're not terminated then we'll know that Brady had something to do with the deflated balls, or else why keep them on the payroll, if not to continue the cover up. So I'd like to see them terminated and Brady to appeal the decision, or else I'd know that Brady, the organization and the NFL are trying to sweep this affair under the rug."I know that I'm juggling apples and oranges and putting words into your mouth at the same time, but the pieces are in place for McNally and Jastremski to be reinstated given the recent "the NFL forced us to suspend them" story line and any backroom deal resolving the appeal by (for example) reducing the suspension to two games, is going to be interpreted by me and most of the public north, south and west of Boston as "sweeping this affair under the rug." I absolutely do think that any future backroom deal (assuming it happens) is additional evidence the Brady had a lot to do with the deflation. Do you agree? Jim It all depends on what Brady does with his appeal. I had hoped that Kraft would appeal, but I suspect that his deal with Goodall hinges on how successful the players union is in reversing Brady's suspension. If a judge rules that the evidence against Brady is flimsy znd the suspension is thrown out, don't you think Goodall should consider dropping the sanctions against the Pats? Flimsy evidense and Goodall's penchant for lying, fabricating evidence, and breaking the CBA to bolster his ego and reputation should be enough to convince anyone that this whole affair is his creation. Don't forget, the union slapped him around rather badly in the Ray Rice appeal, so I wouldn't put it past him to orchestrate the entire Wells investigation just to get even and assert his power. In this battle of lawyers, I believe the Pat's lawyers have done a better job of defending the Pats interests than the Wells group has presenting theirs. I have yet to see evidence that the Wells investigators did not take the deflator comments out of context, so until they do, I' m siding with the Pats. As it is, the Pats's lawyers have done a pretty good job of showing the Wells investigstors taking Brady's phone conversations out of context. The Wells Report seems more goal oriented than truth oriented.
|
|
|
Post by stevec on May 20, 2015 18:41:55 GMT -6
Jim,
Btw, If I were Brady, I would not have let anyone have access to my text messages. Sensitive information is always leaked despite safeguards and promises made. The Wells investigators had access through McNally and Jastremski phone records. Any clsims that Brady didn't cooperate is a joke, and the Patriots' claim the the investigators ignored evidence and failed to follow up with potential witnesses seems entirely plausable considering that Goodall sent the Wells people on a predetermined mission.
|
|