I get that QBs like the ball a certain way, just as golfers like a certain grip material  on their clubs.  But if a golfer altered his clubs so they didn't meet the PGA rules, would the PGA allow that?  More importantly, would they allow the cheater to walk off with the trophy and check?  

---

No,, rule breaking is rule breaking, but the punishment should have to fit the crime. In this instance,, I don't believe the punishment set forth by NFL rules is near as bad as some would like to see.


As for the trophy,, I'm pretty sure the NFL watched the Pats footballs very closely in the Superbowl, as Deflate-gate was the major story the weeks prior to the game. Brady still went out and threw 4 TD and a bunch of yards against one of the best secondaries the NFL has ever seen.


The AFC CHAMPIONSHIP game in the 2nd half (when supposedly the footballs were correct), the Pats scored most of their points and we're practically unstoppable with regulation balls.


I don't think the outcomes of those games would've been any different.


I've heard the argument of fumbling statistics over the past few years (a very valid argument).

However, I've also heard the valid other side of that: over that span of time, the best franchises have much fewer turnovers than the worst franchises of that time span (Raiders, Browns, Jags, Bucs, etc.)


The Pats should and will likely be punished. I just believe it will be fairly light, whatever the discipline is supposed to be already set by the NFL.

---

I think the biggest message this sends is if everyone is doing it and cheating is okay, then there is no reason to not cheat.  If Brady did not feel like he was gaining an advantage then why do it?  Why risk all of this?  

---

I still think the bigger question is why weren't the balls tested just before the start of the game. If there is even a chance that the Pats had an advantage by using illegal balls, then whoever decided to not do anything and thus give the Pats an advantage for 2 quarters should be fired immediately. Was it Roger Goodell's decision, Walt Anderson's decision, or someone in between?


 

Who in the NFL made the choice to disadvantage the Colts, and why? Why isn't a head rolling for this? Whether or not the balls were even deflated isn't known for sure, much less whether Brady himself did anything wrong. But the fact that the NFL suspected that they might be and still did nothing until halftime is 100% known to be true.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/yyhnyn...f-ball-air

---

I still think the bigger question is why weren't the balls tested just before the start of the game. If there is even a chance that the Pats had an advantage by using illegal balls, then whoever decided to not do anything and thus give the Pats an advantage for 2 quarters should be fired immediately. Was it Roger Goodell's decision, Walt Anderson's decision, or someone in between?


 

Who in the NFL made the choice to disadvantage the Colts, and why? Why isn't a head rolling for this? Whether or not the balls were even deflated isn't known for sure, much less whether Brady himself did anything wrong. But the fact that the NFL suspected that they might be and still did nothing until halftime is 100% known to be true.

 

We know they told the head ref and I'm assuming he felt the pressure of not delaying the game to check the balls once they went missing.  It seems like it was Walt Anderson's decision, though the NFL probably should have the head ref worrying about footballs going missing when he is preparing for a game. 

---

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/yyhnyn...f-ball-air

 

There is only one John Stewart.  And yes, I agree, Gronk is pretty awesome.

---

I still think the bigger question is why weren't the balls tested just before the start of the game. If there is even a chance that the Pats had an advantage by using illegal balls, then whoever decided to not do anything and thus give the Pats an advantage for 2 quarters should be fired immediately. Was it Roger Goodell's decision, Walt Anderson's decision, or someone in between?


 

Who in the NFL made the choice to disadvantage the Colts, and why? Why isn't a head rolling for this? Whether or not the balls were even deflated isn't known for sure, much less whether Brady himself did anything wrong. But the fact that the NFL suspected that they might be and still did nothing until halftime is 100% known to be true.

 

Also, you do not think Tom lied when he said he didn't think there was anything to the story and comfortable saying no one was involved in this epic scandal?  You are making arguments, but haven't really said what you think to be true.

---

We know they told the head ref and I'm assuming he felt the pressure of not delaying the game to check the balls once they went missing.  It seems like it was Walt Anderson's decision, though the NFL probably should have the head ref worrying about footballs going missing when he is preparing for a game. 

 

If someone above Walt Anderson told him not to test the balls, then that person should be out on the street by now. Walt Anderson clearly had more information on game day that increased the suspicion. At that point he should have checked the balls in spite of orders from above (assuming there were orders from above). To allow one team an advantage just to avoid starting the game 10 minutes late is inexcusable.


 

Also, you do not think Tom lied when he said he didn't think there was anything to the story and comfortable saying no one was involved in this epic scandal?  You are making arguments, but haven't really said what you think to be true.

 

I have no idea whether or not Brady was lying. He hasn't admitted anything, and neither have the equipment guys. There are reasonable (albeit unlikely) non-cheating explanations for everything. Wells 'more probable than not' statement fits the evidence I've read. A probability of more than 80/20 would have resulted in a stronger statement. I personally think that punishment should require more certainty than that.


 

Goodell has demonstrated several times in the past that he'll punish someone with a lot less proof, so I expect a lengthy suspension. But if he then lets the official cheater slide when that's 100% known, what does that say? In that case I'd say it's more probable than not that Goodell was the one who ordered the game to be started with the Colts at an unfair disadvantage.


 

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

No,, rule breaking is rule breaking, but the punishment should have to fit the crime. In this instance,, I don't believe the punishment set forth by NFL rules is near as bad as some would like to see.

As for the trophy,, I'm pretty sure the NFL watched the Pats footballs very closely in the Superbowl, as Deflate-gate was the major story the weeks prior to the game. Brady still went out and threw 4 TD and a bunch of yards against one of the best secondaries the NFL has ever seen.

The AFC CHAMPIONSHIP game in the 2nd half (when supposedly the footballs were correct), the Pats scored most of their points and we're practically unstoppable with regulation balls.

I don't think the outcomes of those games would've been any different.

I've heard the argument of fumbling statistics over the past few years (a very valid argument).

However, I've also heard the valid other side of that: over that span of time, the best franchises have much fewer turnovers than the worst franchises of that time span (Raiders, Browns, Jags, Bucs, etc.)

The Pats should and will likely be punished. I just believe it will be fairly light, whatever the discipline is supposed to be already set by the NFL.

Yeah, the balls didn't matter in those games so much, but how do you know it didn't come into play during those 16 other games during the regular season to get them into position to make a run at the SB?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Yeah, the balls didn't matter in those games so much, but how do you know it didn't come into play during those 16 other games during the regular season to get them into position to make a run at the SB?

Yup. It's possible, but also maybe they didn't. It's really difficult to prove that it did outcome games,, likely/not likely is pure speculation.


They should and will probably be punished for this though. They got caught breaking the rules, whether it actually gained them an advantage or not.


It's hard to tell if the report is strong enough to do something to Brady, with statements like "he more than probably knew." He might get something too, idk. It just might not be as near severe as alot of people would like.

---

The "HOT" rumor is Brady will suspended 2 games and make his season debut in the Pats 3rd game of the season and he will want to prove himself to all the people who are calling him a cheater.

That would be our luck we get a pissed off Brady week 3

---

Correct me if I'm wrong but the pats had the least amount of fumbles last season seems to me player's  had an easier time holding on to those under sized footballs.

Tom will never admit to what he did because he doesn't think it was a big deal just like belicheat didn't think it was a big deal during spygate.

Why in the world is it that the Pats are the only franchise to get repeatedly accused of cheating?

The only real answer is because they do it with no regard for the rules because they think they are above the rules.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong but the pats had the least amount of fumbles last season seems to me player's  had an easier time holding on to those under sized footballs.

Tom will never admit to what he did because he doesn't think it was a big deal just like belicheat didn't think it was a big deal during spygate.

Why in the world is it that the Pats are the only franchise to get repeatedly accused of cheating?

The only real answer is because they do it with no regard for the rules because they think they are above the rules.

 

The Vikings had the least amount of fumbles. NE was second.


 

Brady will never admit to it. Might that be because he didn't do anything? Would you admit to something you didn't do?


 

Just this past season both Atlanta and Cleveland were found to be cheating. Part of the reason is that nobody cares to report it if a loser is suspected of cheating.


 

There's no doubt that they push the rules to the limit. Their trick with the eligible/ineligible receivers proved that. If anything, I see that as more likelihood that the Pats didn't deflate the balls below 12.5 psi, but made sure they weren't even 0.1 psi above that.


PFT has an interesting story on the measurements with a link to the actual report.



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201.../#comments


 

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

I understand that your a Brady supporter but he would def not admit it if he thought that it would tarnish his legacy.

So don't give me this he's not admitting to it because he didn't do it lots of people who cheat lie about it.

He will do whatever it takes to win and so will belicheat.

I'd still like to know why the Pats are the team most accused of cheating and I don't want to hear this because they always win crap.

They are always accused cause they always look for an advantage and have no problem using that advantage ( even if it's  somehow braking rules) if they don't think people will care.

Plus they've always had Goodell on their side with him being buddy's with Kraft. 

---

The Coverup:

 

The Patriots refused to make "the deflator" McNally available to the Wells investigation.  McNally was interviewed only by NFL Security.  NFL Security did not have any text messages or phone call data at the time of those interviews.  So it's likely McNally pulled a Tom Brady in those interviews.  Once the Wells investigation DID have the text and phone evidence, they summoned McNally, and the Patriots refused to cooperate. 

 

This is likely to get the whole Patriots organization penalized.  It goes beyond Tom Brady and air in footballs.  This is Kraft giving the finger to Goodell.  This is Kraft pledging to cooperate, then cooperating right up to the place where guilt would be found.  But Kraft knew this is exactly how the NFL proceeded with Bountygate.  They dropped the evidence in front of Gregg Williams, and he turned.  Kraft decided to close ranks and play possum once he knew Wells had the damaging texts.

 

By refusing to cooperate, Kraft gets to pretend he is irate about the whole thing.  Kraft even referred to the multiple interviews of McNally in his statement: 

 

"In addition, given our level of cooperation throughout the process, I was offended by the comments made in the Wells Report in reference to not making an individual available for a follow-up interview. What the report fails to mention is that he had already been interviewed four times and we felt the fifth request for access was excessive for a part-time game day employee who has a full-time job with another employer."

 

Ah, so Kraft was only respecting the young mans' work schedule.  Certainly that is the most important thing here, that McNally not miss any more time at his day job.  I wonder if McNally will even require a day job once this blows over.  I suspect he will have a rich sugar daddy named Robert that takes care of all his needs.

---

Just a note: More probable than not is the standard by which Goodell imposes discipline.  This isn't a court of law where it's beyond reasonable doubt.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

The Vikings had the least amount of fumbles. NE was second.


Brady will never admit to it. Might that be because he didn't do anything? Would you admit to something you didn't do?


Just this past season both Atlanta and Cleveland were found to be cheating. Part of the reason is that nobody cares to report it if a loser is suspected of cheating.


There's no doubt that they push the rules to the limit. Their trick with the eligible/ineligible receivers proved that. If anything, I see that as more likelihood that the Pats didn't deflate the balls below 12.5 psi, but made sure they weren't even 0.1 psi above that.


PFT has an interesting story on the measurements with a link to the actual report.


<a class="bbc_url" href='http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/10/pressure-gauge-discrepancies-undermine-wells-report/#comments'>http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/10/pressure-gauge-discrepancies-undermine-wells-report/#comments</a>

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would the balls go missing and why do it in secret if you aren't doing anything illegal?

---

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would the balls go missing and why do it in secret if you aren't doing anything illegal?

 

Why weren't the ball tested immediately after they went missing?

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

I understand that your a Brady supporter but he would def not admit it if he thought that it would tarnish his legacy.

So don't give me this he's not admitting to it because he didn't do it lots of people who cheat lie about it.

He will do whatever it takes to win and so will belicheat.

I'd still like to know why the Pats are the team most accused of cheating and I don't want to hear this because they always win crap.

They are always accused cause they always look for an advantage and have no problem using that advantage ( even if it's  somehow braking rules) if they don't think people will care.

Plus they've always had Goodell on their side with him being buddy's with Kraft. 

 

I'm not a Brady supporter. I just look at the evidence.


 

From what I've read there is nothing close to showing that the pressures were below what would be expected. It's as if someone was being accused of murder when the victim was standing there unharmed. And that's even before this latest revelation:



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...-evidence/

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"