AFJF Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I looked through the other thread and didn't see this mentioned and starting this because it explains the language used in the report...very key IMO. After reading the headlines I figured it was a joke because they didn't say Brady "Definitely knew" or "absolutely cheated". "More probable than not" sounded like a cop out to me but then I heard this on NFL network yesterday. They spoke with an NFL insider who said they used that specific language because that is the threshold that must be met in order to hold a player accountable. Essentially, since this isn't a court of law, the league just wanted Wells to let them know if it was "more probable than not" that Brady/Pats cheated. If so, that's all that was needed. Not 100%, no jury of peers, no "beyond the shadow of a doubt". By rule, the findings of the report meet what the league requires for a guilty verdict. Again, sorry if it was already in the other thread but I went through it and didn't see this mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycdan Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 This sounds like a good drinking game. Instead of 'truth or dare' you say something that's 'more probable than not'. Still, good point and worth a thread since it explains the critical nature of what was said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Actually, this is a really helpful detail to have pulled out of that other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Persiussa Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Bill pollian talked about this on NFL live yesterday. He said when it comes to instances of league integrity that a 51% probability was all the NFL needs to hand down a decision. The words more probable than not means at least 51% and that's why that phrase was used by wells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Funny that you wrote this. The café had CNN on and some "sports reporter" was talking about how nothing would come of this because the NFL did not have evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt." I was literally screaming to myself -"They don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt!" It must have come out as at least a mumble because a few people started staring at me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingToMyGraveGreen Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Sorry Patriots.....you were caught again....CNN's analysis is spot on....Brady won't make first ballot Hall of Fame because of this... http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/06/opinions/robbins-patriots-deflate/index.html Now we see what the Commissioner does with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 More probable than not is the legal equivalent of preponderance of evidence, the standard in civil cases compared to criminal cases. This standard was used for a reason. This is not a criminal case and the NFL wanted to use a universally accepted standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Good catch on this- yes we all have to remember this is not a court of law we are talking about. How much time before we hear a decision by Goodall on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted May 7, 2015 Author Share Posted May 7, 2015 Good catch on this- yes we all have to remember this is not a court of law we are talking about. How much time before we hear a decision by Goodall on this. Heard a couple of outlets yesterday saying they expect to hear something "within a few days" but I could see the league dragging it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mphtrilogy_8577 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 MPTN **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted May 7, 2015 Author Share Posted May 7, 2015 Bill pollian talked about this on NFL live yesterday. He said when it comes to instances of league integrity that a 51% probability was all the NFL needs to hand down a decision. The words more probable than not means at least 51% and that's why that phrase was used by wells. Pretty much what the guest on NFL network was saying yesterday (didn't catch her name) but it's a huge piece of the puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Dragging it out seems like the worst, most unfair thing they could possibly do. That is exactly what I expect. I think they will wait until the court of public opinion weighs in on what the penalty should be and have their lackeys seeding and steering the debate. Then they will pick something in that range. The last thing they want is another Ray Rice deal where they issue a penalty and then realize that it is completely inadequate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingToMyGraveGreen Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I loved the phrase - this is a court of common sense...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted May 7, 2015 Author Share Posted May 7, 2015 Dragging it out seems like the worst, most unfair thing they could possibly do. That is exactly what I expect. I think they will wait until the court of public opinion weighs in on what the penalty should be and have their lackeys seeding and steering the debate. Then they will pick something in that range. The last thing they want is another Ray Rice deal where they issue a penalty and then realize that it is completely inadequate. I actually heard a great point on sports radio this morning. Not out of the question to think Goodell essentially added the release of the report to his own personal league calendar. No need to release it before the draft because the draft itself was already keeping the NFL in the news. Then after giving fans/media a chance to talk about the draft for a week, you release this report on a Wednesday. Remember, big news on the Ray Rice situation was often released on a Friday afternoon so it would be hot for a few hours and then significantly die down during the weekend. Now, this report comes out on a Wednesday afternoon so the talking heads can blab about it for the rest of the week? I wouldn't be surprised if the league announces tomorrow that there will be a decision by next week...keep it hot, keep people talking, then release penalties early/mid week to stay in the spotlight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I loved the phrase - this is a court of common sense...lol It would be nice if that is what it really meant, but mostly it has been a method for the NFL to do what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Good to know. Now nothing left to do but PUNISH the guilty. Ahhhh, so nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I actually heard a great point on sports radio this morning. Not out of the question to think Goodell essentially added the release of the report to his own personal league calendar. No need to release it before the draft because the draft itself was already keeping the NFL in the news. Then after giving fans/media a chance to talk about the draft for a week, you release this report on a Wednesday. Remember, big news on the Ray Rice situation was often released on a Friday afternoon so it would be hot for a few hours and then significantly die down during the weekend. Now, this report comes out on a Wednesday afternoon so the talking heads can blab about it for the rest of the week? I wouldn't be surprised if the league announces tomorrow that there will be a decision by next week...keep it hot, keep people talking, then release penalties early/mid week to stay in the spotlight. You really think they want to keep this in the news? I am sure the league will want this to die down as soon as possible. It's not exactly a feel good story. They release this sh*t at this time of year because it is the dead zone. That doesn't have anything to do with a Pats loving conspiracy, but it is like the steroid story. I am sure they don't want it out there any more than necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingToMyGraveGreen Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 So much for the Patriots reliance on science as their main defense....which somehow...magically....did not affect the Raven's footballs (and in a playoff game no less). I'm just wondering when the rest of the league will get sick of this kind of behavior from the same team repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Harper Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I looked through the other thread and didn't see this mentioned and starting this because it explains the language used in the report...very key IMO. After reading the headlines I figured it was a joke because they didn't say Brady "Definitely knew" or "absolutely cheated". "More probable than not" sounded like a cop out to me but then I heard this on NFL network yesterday. They spoke with an NFL insider who said they used that specific language because that is the threshold that must be met in order to hold a player accountable. Essentially, since this isn't a court of law, the league just wanted Wells to let them know if it was "more probable than not" that Brady/Pats cheated. If so, that's all that was needed. Not 100%, no jury of peers, no "beyond the shadow of a doubt". By rule, the findings of the report meet what the league requires for a guilty verdict. Again, sorry if it was already in the other thread but I went through it and didn't see this mentioned. Very good point which a lot of people (mostly Pats fans) don't get. But if you read the report carefully it is clear that the evidence, while circumstantial, is VERY strong. Criminal prosecutions (beyond a reasonable doubt) have been based on less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 You really think they want to keep this in the news? I am sure the league will want this to die down as soon as possible. It's not exactly a feel good story. They release this sh*t at this time of year because it is the dead zone. That doesn't have anything to do with a Pats loving conspiracy, but it is like the steroid story. I am sure they don't want it out there any more than necessary. Excuse me Uncle Dom? This is the feel good story of the year as far as this fatman is concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keysersoze Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 You just know that douchebag Kraft and his lapdog lawyers and PR reps will exploit that wording to no end. In Pats world, more probably than not = you can't prove anything. Therefore, we didn't do anything. ****ers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keysersoze Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I was watching Sportscenter last night, and one of their guests brought up an interesting point. Even if the evidence is only circumstantial, the standard of proof as far as NFL procedure goes is based on preponderance of evidence. Basically, so long as it's greater than 50% likelihood that the Pats deflated the balls and knew about it, they are technically culpable of wrongdoing. Therefore, even if Kraft and the Pats organization tried to exploit the wording of the report, they are dead in the water per NFL regulations. Open and shut case, just penalize Brady and get on with our lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted May 7, 2015 Author Share Posted May 7, 2015 You really think they want to keep this in the news? I am sure the league will want this to die down as soon as possible. It's not exactly a feel good story. They release this sh*t at this time of year because it is the dead zone. That doesn't have anything to do with a Pats loving conspiracy, but it is like the steroid story. I am sure they don't want it out there any more than necessary. I get what you're saying, but I honestly don't think they care. They're unstoppable at this point....like the old saying "no such thing as bad publicity"...Ray Rice story didn't fit that saying so they put it out at 3:00 on a Friday. Brady report on a Wed afternoon? I guess we'll see. If they don't want it out there then they should have spent all day and night then all day today deciding appropriate suspension between Goodell and Vincent, then make the announcement today. I'm not saying the theory is a given, I'm just saying it wouldn't surprise me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 This is great if for no other reason than I saw obnoxious gasbag Peter King on TV this morning saying Brady shouldn't be suspended because they don't have definitive proof. His other, insanely nonsensical argument for no suspension was that it would tarnish Brady's legacy to have the league suspend him for cheating. Two points on that one: 1. The commissioner should in no way consider anyone's legacy when determining punishment. 2. Tom Brady tarnished his own legacy by cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgb Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I looked through the other thread and didn't see this mentioned and starting this because it explains the language used in the report...very key IMO. After reading the headlines I figured it was a joke because they didn't say Brady "Definitely knew" or "absolutely cheated". "More probable than not" sounded like a cop out to me but then I heard this on NFL network yesterday. They spoke with an NFL insider who said they used that specific language because that is the threshold that must be met in order to hold a player accountable. Essentially, since this isn't a court of law, the league just wanted Wells to let them know if it was "more probable than not" that Brady/Pats cheated. If so, that's all that was needed. Not 100%, no jury of peers, no "beyond the shadow of a doubt". By rule, the findings of the report meet what the league requires for a guilty verdict. Again, sorry if it was already in the other thread but I went through it and didn't see this mentioned. But Kraft said the standard should be "irrefutable, smoking gun proof" gee if only there was a video showing the balls being deflated with Brady cackling maniacally in the background. Oh wait... I guess videos don't count either according to the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgb Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 This is great if for no other reason than I saw obnoxious gasbag Peter King on TV this morning saying Brady shouldn't be suspended because they don't have definitive proof. His other, insanely nonsensical argument for no suspension was that it would tarnish Brady's legacy to have the league suspend him for cheating. Two points on that one: 1. The commissioner should in no way consider anyone's legacy when determining punishment. 2. Tom Brady tarnished his own legacy by cheating. Agree the crime tarnishes legacy, not the punishment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 nightmare: Arrogant Tom is suspended 6 games. Garoppolo practices with the 1st team all summer, starts the pre season games, has a rough outing his first couple of games and then, in game 6, clicks on all cylinders (against NYJ) and a new star is born. NE has their next franchise QB for the next 12 years. Deflategate = Mo Lewis. Then I woke up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I get what you're saying, but I honestly don't think they care. They're unstoppable at this point....like the old saying "no such thing as bad publicity"...Ray Rice story didn't fit that saying so they put it out at 3:00 on a Friday. Brady report on a Wed afternoon? I guess we'll see. If they don't want it out there then they should have spent all day and night then all day today deciding appropriate suspension between Goodell and Vincent, then make the announcement today. I'm not saying the theory is a given, I'm just saying it wouldn't surprise me. If I had to guess, it would be that the texts were getting leaked, so they put the whole report out. Goodell said the interviews were done by April 27th. They could have released that thing any time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerfish Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 You just know that douchebag Kraft and his lapdog lawyers and PR reps will exploit that wording to no end. In Pats world, more probably than not = you can't prove anything. Therefore, we didn't do anything. ****ers. True but their actions will tell the story, they cannot do a thing about it. Zero chance they would take that next step by getting lawyers and courts involved to make the league 'prove it' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingToMyGraveGreen Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Somebody needs to come up with a new Patriots logo to go along with the "The Deflater" Jim McNally calls himself....CNN is right...you cannot make this stuff up!...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 deflating footballs spying on the other team's practices endless camera feeds during the games to steal calls jamming the other team's radio headsets on key 3rd downs microphones on the DTs to pick up the OL blocking calls giving the home QB an extra few seconds on his headset before the snap in the last 14 years, the Patriots at home are 3 standard deviations from the norm when it comes to covering the spread. 3 standard deviations is more than 99.7% from the mean. It's like the very edge of the bell curve. “The average NFL team since 2002 wins just 4.5 of its home games, yet the Patriots win seven out of eight every year for 11 years — three standard deviations from the rest of the league,” said O’Leary, noting in particular that New England went 8-0 at home in 2009 but just 2-6 on the road. Even more suspicious, O’Leary writes, is the Patriots’ uncanny success in covering the point spread both home and away the past 11 years. New England is 109-69-6 against the spread since 2001, producing a net of 40 winning bets that Zang writes is once again nearly three standard statistical deviations from the rest of the league — “an extremely rare case.” “The statistical evidence seems to show they’re still using a non-football advantage,” O’Leary said. “I’m not saying they’re cheating, but this isn’t a win-all-your-home-games league.” http://nypost.com/2012/10/21/book-stats-say-patriots-antics-havent-stopped-after-spygate/ Tom Brady a miracle 6th round pick, skinny beanpole with zero athleticism he's either the smartest QB to ever play the game or just the best cheater in the history of professional sports. Maybe both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 More probable than not is the legal equivalent of preponderance of evidence, the standard in civil cases compared to criminal cases. This standard was used for a reason. This is not a criminal case and the NFL wanted to use a universally accepted standard. Booya, "You just been lawyered." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetdawgg Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 A suspension for the ages..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 This is great if for no other reason than I saw obnoxious gasbag Peter King on TV this morning saying Brady shouldn't be suspended because they don't have definitive proof. His other, insanely nonsensical argument for no suspension was that it would tarnish Brady's legacy to have the league suspend him for cheating. Two points on that one: 1. The commissioner should in no way consider anyone's legacy when determining punishment. 2. Tom Brady tarnished his own legacy by cheating. Parenting 101 1. Teach your kids about accountability for their actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Crusher Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 nightmare: Arrogant Tom is suspended 6 games. Garoppolo practices with the 1st team all summer, starts the pre season games, has a rough outing his first couple of games and then, in game 6, clicks on all cylinders (against NYJ) and a new star is born. NE has their next franchise QB for the next 12 years. Deflategate = Mo Lewis. Then I woke up. Then Williams and Sheldon break free on a pass play and it takes 6 1/2 months to find poor Jimmy's remains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.