Jet Fan RI Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 American Enterprise Institute finds Wells Report 'deeply flawed' By Jared Dubin | Staff Writer June 14, 2015 9:44 am ET An independent report says the Wells Report was flawed. (Getty Images) According to a study conducted by the American Enterprise Institute, the Wells Report – the independent investigation conducted by Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP litigation partner Ted Wells upon which the NFL based the punishment that was handed down to the New England Patriots and quarterback Tom Brady for Deflategate – is "deeply flawed." The American Enterprise Institute is a Washington, D.C.-based think tank whose mission is "to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism—limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate," according its web site. The study's abstract (a one-paragraph summary of its findings) is below: In the current “Deflategate” controversy, the New England Patriots have been accused of illicitly deflating footballs before the start of their 2015 American Football Conference championship game against the Indianapolis Colts. The National Football League and the lawyers it hired have produced a report — commonly known as the “Wells report” — that has been used to justify penalties against the Patriots and quarterback Tom Brady. Although the Wells report finds that the Patriots footballs declined in pressure significantly more than the Colts balls in the first half of the game, our replication of the report's analysis finds that it relies on an unorthodox statistical procedure at odds with the methodology the report describes. It also fails to investigate all relevant scenarios. In addition, it focuses only on the difference between the Colts and Patriots pressure drops. Such a difference, however, can be caused either by the pressure in the Patriots balls dropping below their expected value or by the pressure in the Colts balls rising above their expected value. The second of these two scenarios seems more likely based on the absolute pressure measurements. Logistically, the greater change in pressure in the Patriots footballs can be explained by the fact that sufficient time may have passed between halftime testing of the two teams' balls for the Colts balls to warm significantly, effectively inflating them. In an accompanying New York Times article, Kevin A. Hasset and Stan A. Veuger, who authored the study, wrote, "Our study, written with our colleague Joseph Sullivan, examines the evidence and methodology of the Wells report and concludes that it is deeply flawed." The conclusion centers mostly on the scientific analysis conducted in the Wells Report. An excerpt explaining some of the flaws is below: The Wells report's main finding is that the Patriots balls declined in pressure more than the Colts balls did in the first half of their game, and that the decline is highly statistically significant. For the sake of argument, let's grant this finding for now. Even still, it alone does not prove misconduct. There are, after all, two possibilities. The first is that the Patriots balls declined too much. The second — overlooked by the Wells report — is that the Colts balls declined too little. The latter possibility appears to be more likely. The Wells report notes the expected pressure for the footballs at halftime in the Patriots-Colts game, factoring in the decline in pressure to be expected when a ball, inflated in a warm room, has been moved to a cold outdoor field. If the Patriots deflated their balls, their pressure levels at halftime should have fallen below the expected level, while the Colts balls at halftime should have hovered around that level. But when we analyzed the data provided in the Wells report, we found that the Patriots balls declined by about the expected amount, while the Colts balls declined by less. In fact, the pressure of the Colts balls was statistically significantly higher than expected. Contrary to the report, the significant difference between the changes in pressure of the two teams' balls was not because the pressure of the Patriots balls was too low, but because that of the Colts balls was too high. How could this be? The report's own findings suggest an explanation: At halftime, N.F.L. officials measured the pressure of “only a sample” of the Colts balls (four out of 12) before they ran out of time; the second half of the game was about to begin. This implies that the Colts balls sat in the warm room where they were to be measured — and thus increased in pressure — for almost the entirety of halftime before being measured. All of the 11 available Patriots balls, by contrast, were measured at halftime, which suggests that they were measured earlier, when they were colder — and thus lower in pressure. Although this explanation contradicts the Wells report's conclusions, it fits all the evidence. The Times article ends with a recommendation from Hasset and Veuger that when the Roger Goodell hears Brady's appeal of his four-game suspension, he does so with the knowledge that the Wells Report is unreliable, though it stops short of suggesting any specific action Goodell should take with that knowledge. When Hasset and Veuger presented similar findings about the Bountygate scandal at an NFL hearing in November 2012, the league later vacated all the players' suspensions. Topics: Tom Brady, Indianapolis Colts, New England Patriots, NFL http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25214166/american-enterprise-institute-finds-wells-report-deeply-flawed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 By my reading of the Wells report, the issue raised in this article was considered during the testing. I sure hope the physicist who approved the test results has a chance to comment on this before the Brady hearing. In my judgment, this article's point is not valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well I am just shocked. Given that the AEI is a beacon of ethical practice, this report should settle everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 WHy would a right wing political think tank focus on deflated balls issue. Oh wait.....their time and name can be bought for monetary considerations. Wonder how much Kraft had to pay for this report. At this point it just shows the desperation of Robert Kraft to control the damage to the brand name of his franchise and dull out the taint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 LOL, the AEI. A company who ditches their top employees if the backers don't care for their opinions, regardless of the validity of their work. About as bought as you can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well I am just shocked. Given that the AEI is a beacon of ethical practice, this report should settle everything. Pretty sure if you paid AEI enough, they could write a 200 page manuscript on how my penis cures aging. Been saving up for a while now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFCEastFan Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 By my reading of the Wells report, the issue raised in this article was considered during the testing. I sure hope the physicist who approved the test results has a chance to comment on this before the Brady hearing. In my judgment, this article's point is not valid. I'd be surprised if Jeffrey Kessler would waste his client's money like that, but I defer to you since I remember from when the Wells Report was released that you read it very closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuscanyTile2 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Am quite sick of this topic. I wouldn't have an issue if they didn't suspend anyone and just pretended like it didn't happen. The refs should be in charge of the football anyway. It's absurd that they let the teams control them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 I'd be surprised if Jeffrey Kessler would waste his client's money like that, but I defer to you since I remember from when the Wells Report was released that you read it very closely. I did indeed read it closely. And the timing of this new result is suspiciously close to when the Brady suspension hearing will be held. Also suspicious is that the basis of the objection is the same as that being advanced by Pat fans: That the Colt balls were measured later than the Pat balls so they warmed up more. But contrary to the claim made in the new article, the testing did take into account the fact that the Colt balls were measured later. See pp. 60-61 of the tech report (or pp. 220-221 of the attachment to the Wells report). In short, even accounting for the different times at which the two sets of balls were measured; and accounting for the possibility that one set of balls was wetter or dryer than the other set; and even accounting for the differences between the two pressure-gauge types, the Pat balls showed significantly more deflation than can be attributed to natural causes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersJetFan Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Pretty sure if you paid AEI enough, they could write a 200 page manuscript on how my penis cures aging. Been saving up for a while now. YOU PROMISED ME YOU WERE TELLING THE TRUTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 This thread has everything. I'm so excited I just peed myself a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohio State NY Jets fan Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I am waiting for the report from the JetNation Institute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Nice report, debates science as the cause and ignores the texts by those who deflated the footballs and the QB who ordered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I'm reserving judgement until The Heritage Foundation weighs in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 This was the same think tank group that claimed the Saints injured fewer players than other teams so Bountygate was flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayNoToDMC Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well sh*t. If a right wing think tank that bribes scientists to deny global warming question the science who am I to argue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 The comments are even better than ever on this thread over on PFT. "All my LIFE I've been calling people on diets The Deflator" said one delusional Pats defender. I have been on this planet now let's see I'm in the middle of my 7th decade now and NOT ONCE in my 59 and a half years have I EVER heard of one person on a diet being called a deflator. Who knows, maybe it's a New England thing but I am willing to be that THAT guy has never heard it either until his Boston baked brain made it up. They. Are. Sad. And Pathetic. The unhappiest bunch of losers who have so much to be happy for when it comes to the game of professional football-well they USED to anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well sh*t. If a right wing think tank that bribes scientists to deny global warming question the science who am I to argue? Defending their new hero and future face of the team after he's finally done cheating at the game of football will be with AEI. They LOVED how he snubbed that (now use your redneck toothless voice and attach your sense of humor most importantly and continue) niggra-boy presidint by not going to the Black House to be honored by the man who has ruined this country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 This was the same think tank group that claimed the Saints injured fewer players than other teams so Bountygate was flawed. Right. The worrisome aspect is that, according to the article posted here, the Bountygate suspensions of all the players were vacated based on what that group presented in that case. That's why I'm hoping the physicist who approved the test results shown in the Wells report responds to this article, or rather the new report underlying it, before the Brady suspension hearing. No telling how Goodell will take the group's claims in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFlaJets Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 WHy would a right wing political think tank focus on deflated balls issue.? Oh wait.....their time and name can be bought for monetary considerations. Wonder how much Kraft had to pay for this report. At this point it just shows the desperation of Robert Kraft to control the damage to the brand name of his franchise and dull out the taint. Brady snubbed the White House invite=RW gold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Right. The worrisome aspect is that, according to the article posted here, the Bountygate suspensions of all the players were vacated based on what that group presented in that case. That's why I'm hoping the physicist who approved the test results shown in the Wells report responds to this article, or rather the new report underlying it, before the Brady suspension hearing. No telling how Goodell will take the group's claims in this case. I'm guessing they're full of sh*t, they're surmising that the suspensions were reduced because of their stupid findings trying to make themselves and their findings more relevant. Interesting to me is that they disregard the texts, the words of the people in charge of the balls, the refusal to help by Brady, the common sense aspects of this to try and discredit the report with hazy science to prove points that have nothing to do with the important part. They cheated and that's not going away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Brady snubbed the White House invite=RW goldBrady's a racist. Stephen A. smith said so Maybe this American Enterprise Institute can disprove this with hokey voodoo science too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohio State NY Jets fan Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Pretty sure if you paid AEI enough, they could write a 200 page manuscript on how my penis cures aging. Been saving up for a while now. Careful what you wish for, only old people want to be young, not that there is anything wrong with the cryptkeeper if you are into that sort of thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycdan Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well sh*t. If a right wing think tank that bribes scientists to deny global warming question the science who am I to argue? I love the part where they took money from ExxonMobil and then tried to debunk global warming on the basis of 'science'. Yep...solid contributors to society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 I'm guessing they're full of sh*t, they're surmising that the suspensions were reduced because of their stupid findings trying to make themselves and their findings more relevant. Interesting to me is that they disregard the texts, the words of the people in charge of the balls, the refusal to help by Brady, the common sense aspects of this to try and discredit the report with hazy science to prove points that have nothing to do with the important part. They cheated and that's not going away. To those who can understand the appendix, the material in there is just as damning as the other aspects you mention. Among those who cannot understand the appendix must be included the authors of this latest report. Otherwise, how can they claim that the fact that the Colt balls were sitting at room temperature longer than the Pat balls was not addressed? It's right in there, and it still shows the Pat balls deflated more than can be explained by natural causes, while the Colt balls did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuscanyTile2 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I love the part where they took money from ExxonMobil and then tried to debunk global warming on the basis of 'science'. Yep...solid contributors to society. Believe what you want but Global Warming is a farce as far as I'm concerned. Pure bunk to tax the citizenry for something that only "experts" (e.g. paid shills) can measure. Just pay .gov your protection money and all will be well. They'll even kick back a few bucks to Woody Johnson to advertise military propaganda during games! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well, it took one whole page to truly get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.