Ted Wells report on Deflate Gate being released now
- Thread starter Football51
- Start date
Albert Breer @AlbertBreer · 3m3 minutes agoAll 11 of the Patriots' ball measured at halftime of the AFC title game came in under 12.5 PSI. The one the Colts turned in wasn't measured.
Albert Breer @AlbertBreer · 2m2 minutes agoFrom the Wells report: "“It is more probable than not that the Patriots personnel participated in violations of the Playing Rule"
Albert Breer @AlbertBreer · 1m1 minute agoHere are the halftime measurements ...
"it is more probable than not that New England Patriots personnel participated in violations of the playing rules"
Albert Breer @AlbertBreer · 50s50 seconds agoRe: Sting: "We believe that it was not inappropriate for the game officials todisallow a ball of questionable authenticity into the game."
"it is also our view that it is more probable than not that Tom Brady (the quarterback for the Patriots) was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities of McNally and Jastremski involving the release of air from Patriots game balls."
But...but...Kraft DEMANDS an apology!
S
sg3
Guest
Lmao
Here's a bit that will stir some interest - refusal to cooperate fully
As noted, there was a significant exception to the cooperation provided by the
Patriots. Although we requested a follow-up interview of Jim McNally after our initial
interview, counsel for the Patriots refused our request. We offered to conduct the interview at
any time or location that would be convenient for McNally, and explained—both in writing and
in-person during other meetings—that our follow-up questions would be limited to subject
matter directly relevant to the investigation that was developed following our initial interview
with McNally. McNally was one of the earliest Patriots personnel interviewed by our
investigative team and a number of important follow-up questions had arisen based on
subsequent interviews and information discovered after our initial interview of McNally.
Counsel for the Patriots, however, declined to produce McNally, and communicated an
unwillingness even to advise McNally of our request for a follow-up interview. We do not know
definitively whether McNally was, in fact, informed of our request. The investigative process
would have benefited from further questioning of McNally on certain topics, and we believe that
the actions of the Patriots and their counsel in this regard are inconsistent both with the club‟s
public pronouncements of full cooperation with the investigation and its obligations under
Section 2 of the Policy on Integrity of the Game & Enforcement of Competitive Rules.3
The
3 We made written requests to counsel for the Patriots on February 28, March 2, 3, 9 and 17 for a follow-up
interview with McNally. Counsel for the Patriots repeatedly refused to make McNally available for a reinterview
claiming, among other things, that McNally lived more than an hour away and already had missed
work at his full-time job to attend earlier interviews. In addition, counsel for the Patriots asked that we provide 29
findings set forth herein are nevertheless supported firmly and thoroughly by the evidence and
information available to us during the course of our work.
As noted, there was a significant exception to the cooperation provided by the
Patriots. Although we requested a follow-up interview of Jim McNally after our initial
interview, counsel for the Patriots refused our request. We offered to conduct the interview at
any time or location that would be convenient for McNally, and explained—both in writing and
in-person during other meetings—that our follow-up questions would be limited to subject
matter directly relevant to the investigation that was developed following our initial interview
with McNally. McNally was one of the earliest Patriots personnel interviewed by our
investigative team and a number of important follow-up questions had arisen based on
subsequent interviews and information discovered after our initial interview of McNally.
Counsel for the Patriots, however, declined to produce McNally, and communicated an
unwillingness even to advise McNally of our request for a follow-up interview. We do not know
definitively whether McNally was, in fact, informed of our request. The investigative process
would have benefited from further questioning of McNally on certain topics, and we believe that
the actions of the Patriots and their counsel in this regard are inconsistent both with the club‟s
public pronouncements of full cooperation with the investigation and its obligations under
Section 2 of the Policy on Integrity of the Game & Enforcement of Competitive Rules.3
The
3 We made written requests to counsel for the Patriots on February 28, March 2, 3, 9 and 17 for a follow-up
interview with McNally. Counsel for the Patriots repeatedly refused to make McNally available for a reinterview
claiming, among other things, that McNally lived more than an hour away and already had missed
work at his full-time job to attend earlier interviews. In addition, counsel for the Patriots asked that we provide 29
findings set forth herein are nevertheless supported firmly and thoroughly by the evidence and
information available to us during the course of our work.
I posted the full report. Saving some of you guys some time, basically:
1. Wells has his own scientists, who dismiss the idea that atmospheric change caused that degree of a drop.
2. There are text messages between two Patriots employees, including a locker room attendant, talking about a needle, deflation, and receiving gifts from Brady.
3. Brady was involved in discussions regarding the deflation, evidence he was aware of what was happening.
4. Brady refused to allow investigators access to any electronic correspondence of his pertaining to the scope of the investigation.
Now, the Pats cooperated with the investigation. HOWEVER, Brady denied any knowledge of it, and Kraft demanded an apology from the league. To me, Brady basically committed de facto perjury (not true perjury, as it was not in a court of law). Kraft was proven to be completely wrong. How much Belichick knew, who knows (although I am not sure Brady cheats like this if Belichick does not create a culture of cheating around the Patriots)?
1. Wells has his own scientists, who dismiss the idea that atmospheric change caused that degree of a drop.
2. There are text messages between two Patriots employees, including a locker room attendant, talking about a needle, deflation, and receiving gifts from Brady.
3. Brady was involved in discussions regarding the deflation, evidence he was aware of what was happening.
4. Brady refused to allow investigators access to any electronic correspondence of his pertaining to the scope of the investigation.
Now, the Pats cooperated with the investigation. HOWEVER, Brady denied any knowledge of it, and Kraft demanded an apology from the league. To me, Brady basically committed de facto perjury (not true perjury, as it was not in a court of law). Kraft was proven to be completely wrong. How much Belichick knew, who knows (although I am not sure Brady cheats like this if Belichick does not create a culture of cheating around the Patriots)?
Not sure it's that high, but it's obvious why it didn't come out until after the draft.
the footnote in the portion I quoted continues
in advance the subjects we proposed to cover, submit written interrogatories, and stated that “you have given
me very little incentive or basis to try to get him back once more.” As noted above, we offered to meet with
McNally at any time and any location that was convenient and explained that it would not be appropriate from
an investigative standpoint to disclose in advance the specific subjects we intended to cover. We cautioned
counsel for the Patriots in writing that: the “refusal to make Mr. McNally available for a brief follow-up
interview raises serious concerns and is inconsistent with the obligations of the Patriots under the League Rules
to provide „full support and cooperation‟ in the investigation. We also believe it is inconsistent with the public
expressions of cooperation by the Patriots.” Counsel for the Patriots continued to refuse to make McNally
available as requested.
in advance the subjects we proposed to cover, submit written interrogatories, and stated that “you have given
me very little incentive or basis to try to get him back once more.” As noted above, we offered to meet with
McNally at any time and any location that was convenient and explained that it would not be appropriate from
an investigative standpoint to disclose in advance the specific subjects we intended to cover. We cautioned
counsel for the Patriots in writing that: the “refusal to make Mr. McNally available for a brief follow-up
interview raises serious concerns and is inconsistent with the obligations of the Patriots under the League Rules
to provide „full support and cooperation‟ in the investigation. We also believe it is inconsistent with the public
expressions of cooperation by the Patriots.” Counsel for the Patriots continued to refuse to make McNally
available as requested.
Reminds me of this classic:
Between that and Brady's unwillingness to allow access to his electronic communications, this sounds like both guilt and a cover-up.
So, we have conclusions that they probably tampered with the balls, that Brady probably knew and that the Pats did not cooperate fully with the investigation. Multiple hooks.
Wonder what Mr. McNally has to say - or has to hide? Investigative journalists have at least one interesting avenue......
As is often said, the violation is often less harmful than the coverup.
Wonder what Mr. McNally has to say - or has to hide? Investigative journalists have at least one interesting avenue......
As is often said, the violation is often less harmful than the coverup.