deflate gate report

[Grobb 1999]

Originally Posted by Barkingturtle [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's not called direct responsibility. It's called conspiracy. Just don't want you to continue suffering that particular ignorance.

And the report says Brady paid him off with autographed items. So what? It implies nothing. That's standard procedure in every locker room. Equipment managers make dick. The collectibles supplement their meager incomes.

If I were Brady, I'd get out in front of this thing and sue the league office and the authors of the report for real damages done to my reputation.

Lol wut? Guy makes 75k easy when you ask somebody to do something wrong, you are, get this- directly responsible. That's what directly responsible means short bus

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Grobb 1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Lol wut? Guy makes 75k easy when you ask somebody to do something wrong, you are, get this- directly responsible. That's what directly responsible means short bus

Is there any evidence that Brady asked him to deflate the balls?

[Barkingturtle]

Originally Posted by Grobb 1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

when you ask somebody to do something wrong, you are, get this- directly responsible. That's what directly responsible means short bus

You're just wrong.

For example: I could ask you to go fuck yourself, I could even bribe you with a signed shirt, but it is ultimately your decision whether or not to fulfill my request. Maybe it would be different if Tom was holding the dude's family hostage or something and demanding he deflate his balls.

[Grobb 1999]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Is there any evidence that Brady asked him to deflate the balls?

Common sense. All 3 were exchanging text mssgs, Brady won't let them look at his phone and the biggest one of all. No way on this fucking earth does-

a) Brady not notice when any carpenter can tell the difference between hammers and that's only 2 oz. (14/16/18/20) with their eyes closed ( I can)

b) those two do that on their own in the hyper OCD world of professional sports and the NFL especially when they break in each ball by hand over a period of hours

[Samoht]

Wells’ constant use of “more probable than not” in explaining Brady’s role is the standard the NFL was looking for to find him in violation of the rules. The league considers that as good as guilty and just a way of phrasing it in legal terms.

Two days ago, former Bills, Panthers and Colts GM Bill Polian, a former member of the competition committee, said on ESPN that the phrase “is the standard of proof that the NFL has used for about seven years or so that means in English: they’re guilty. . . . This is not running through a stop sign, this is not speeding five miles over the limit. This is a serious competitive violation that has to be treated as such by the league.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.2215881

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Grobb 1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Common sense. All 3 were exchanging text mssgs, Brady won't let them look at his phone and the biggest one of all. No way on this fucking earth does-

a) Brady not notice when any carpenter can tell the difference between hammers and that's only 2 oz. (14/16/18/20) with their eyes closed ( I can)

b) those two do that on their own in the hyper OCD world of professional sports and the NFL especially when they break in each ball by hand over a period of hours

Well that's great and all. However, you would think if you were going to rally to suspend a guy for a whole season you could at least supply some evidence beyond purely circumstantial. If you're going with the guilt by association implication, then he should reasonably only be expected to get a fine.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well that's great and all. However, you would think if you were going to rally to suspend a guy for a whole season you could at least supply some evidence beyond purely circumstantial. If you're going with the guilt by association implication, then he should reasonably only be expected to get a fine.

Oh my. It's almost as if you've ignored every post in this thread not authored by yourself.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh my. It's almost as if you've ignored every post in this thread not authored by yourself.

Hows that?

[Samoht]

There's a lot of proof that Brady had the balls deflated, and it's not just circumstantial.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There's a lot of proof that Brady had the balls deflated, and it's not just circumstantial.

Hows that?