N Y Times: Deflating Deflategate, the evidence & methodology of the Wells report is deeply flawed

Rangeline Fan

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Mar 22, 2007
39,101
8,372
113
Interesting...seems like you learned to quote the same way you cherry pick research information...
 

Zizkov

Moderator
Moderator
Nov 25, 2002
32,443
3,125
113
Prague
I'm only interested in facts, not speculation.

You know, like the Pats have been fined for cheating twice with B&B.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
The best deflategate article yet written, Sally Jenkins, Washington Post sports writer, calls Wells Report a 'falsified report"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...fcbaa6-1456-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html

Tom Brady is said to be seeking total exoneration, and it appears he’s entitled to it. The idea that Brady and the New England Patriots intentionally deflated footballs for a competitive advantage has been discredited by everyone from sidewalk chemists to Web physicists to unlicensed ceramicists, not to mention your own common sense....

see more at link above

a few high points
:

he Wells report “relies on an unorthodox statistical procedure at odds with the methodology the report describes.” Translation: The Wells report said it would use one equation, but then used a different (and weird) equation to arrive at its numbers....

Falsifying results..

Goodell hammered people who appear to have done nothing...

One e-mail exchange, in which Brady complained that some game balls against the New York Jets were ludicrously overinflated. Is this evidence of ill intent? Hardly. Brady’s solution to the over-inflation was to suggest the refs check the rulebook. Not the act of a cheater...

it was a frame job by the commissioner’s office desperate to reestablish its authority.

-----------

marry me, Sally!

-edited to unwad Goat's panties
 
Last edited:

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
53,957
26,717
113
Margaritaville
best deflategate article yet written, Sally Jenkins, Washington Post sports writer, calls Wells Report a 'falsified report"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...fcbaa6-1456-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html

Tom Brady is said to be seeking total exoneration, and it appears he’s entitled to it. The idea that Brady and the New England Patriots intentionally deflated footballs for a competitive advantage has been discredited by everyone from sidewalk chemists to Web physicists to unlicensed ceramicists, not to mention your own common sense. But most importantly, it is utterly shredded in a new scientific analysis by the American Enterprise Institute, which shows the only inflation problem is in NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s head.

The NFL paid millions for a fundamentally flawed report by lawyer Ted Wells that made Brady and the Patriots out to be slam-dunk guilty, based on more than 100 pages of mathematical analysis of ball pressurization . . . that turns out to be erroneous. The AEI’s report totally rejects the finding that the footballs used by the Patriots in the AFC Championship had a significant drop in air pressure compared to those used by the Colts. But the truly damning sentence is this one, buried in its erudite phrasings and equations: “The Wells report’s statistical analysis cannot be replicated by performing the analysis as described in the report,” the AEI concludes.

Translated into normal English: The math didn’t add up. It’s a standard principle in science: If you can’t replicate a set of results, then there is a problem with them. A flaw or a fraud is at work. Either you made a mistake, or you made it up.

When the AEI analysts looked more closely at how such a mistake could have been made, what they found “astonished” them, says the report’s co-author Stan Veuger. The Wells report “relies on an unorthodox statistical procedure at odds with the methodology the report describes.” Translation: The Wells report said it would use one equation, but then used a different (and weird) equation to arrive at its numbers.

“It was really clumsy,” Veuger says. “It’s the kind of mistake you’d see in freshman statistics class.”

Another plain English phrase possibly applies to all of this:

Falsifying results.

Normally, these “special counsel” reports are airtight documents. They’re meant to give sports leagues an unshakeable legal basis for discipline and protect league integrity. The report by Major League Baseball on Pete Rose’s gambling was an unassailable document of 215 pages that included 313 witnesses and seven volumes of exhibits, including bank and phone records, and transcripts of interviews, that made it impossible for Rose to fight his banishment. But lately the NFL has begun turning these special counsel investigations into manipulated campaigns calculated to enhance the commissioner’s profile and powers.

And they seem to be written to fit predetermined conclusions.

Twice now Goodell has ginned up false scandals that seriously and unfairly targeted individual players, and damaged franchises, on what turned out to be bogus or flawed evidence. Forget his bungled handling of Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice — at least those guys actually did something wrong. In the DeflateGate and BountyGate affairs, Goodell hammered people who appear to have done nothing.

The AEI’s entry into DeflateGate is important, because the institute was a major factor in righting the Goodell-driven injustice in BountyGate back in 2012. The commissioner went all hanging judge on the New Orleans Saints, suspending several officials and players for a supposed bonuses system to injure opponents between 2009 and 2011. But then AEI analyzed injury data — something that surely the commissioner should have done. The AEI found that the Saints injured fewer opposing players than all but two teams in 2009 and all but one from 2009 to 2011. After AEI’s report was presented at an NFL hearing, the suspensions were vacated.

AEI is a conservative think tank that normally doesn’t get into sports issues. But given their experience with BountyGate, the DeflateGate case was too inviting. The discussion of ball pressurization in the Wells Report was so contested that Veuger and Kevin Hassett, AEI’s director of economic studies, decided to examine it.

“There was a lot of talk about the report not being good,” Veuger said, “and a fairly big chunk of it was stats analysis and data, and we thought, ‘We might as well look at this one and see if it holds up.’ It’s really hobby.”

Goodell is now in a truly interesting and awkward position. In one week he will hear Brady’s appeal. He has said, “I very much look forward to hearing from Mr. Brady and to considering any new information he may bring to my attention.”

Well, here is a boatload of very inconvenient new information.

Does Goodell stand by the conclusions of the Wells report, dig in and refuse to budge — thus establishing that he’s incapable of fairly considering evidence and is a serial abuser of his powers? Does he try to parse and sidestep the AEI analysis, by claiming that the scientific evidence is just a small part of the case against Brady? Trouble with that is, more than half of the Wells report’s 243 pages is taken up by pressure gauges and pounds-per-square-inch analysis — all of which must be thrown out according to AEI. If the balls weren’t deflated, then what’s left? One e-mail exchange, in which Brady complained that some game balls against the New York Jets were ludicrously overinflated. Is this evidence of ill intent? Hardly. Brady’s solution to the over-inflation was to suggest the refs check the rulebook. Not the act of a cheater.

Or does Goodell do the right thing and rescind Brady’s suspension on the basis of the new info in the AEI report — thus admitting that the league spent millions on a railroading farce? There is trouble for Goodell in this option too, because it suggests that the league office under Goodell’s leadership is either incapable of executing a proper investigation, or unwilling to.

The AEI analysis suggests that NFL Players Association Director DeMaurice Smith was right when he said the Wells report “delivered exactly what the client wanted.” It suggests that this wasn’t an investigation; it was a frame job by the commissioner’s office desperate to reestablish its authority.

Brady may or may not win his appeal. But there is one sure loser here, trapped in a box of his own making: the commissioner.
-----------

marry me, Sally!
You do realize that you are constantly engaging in copyright infringement, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: patrick593

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
I gave full credit to the author, newspaper, and gave a link.

I know that you turds would be too lazy to click on a link, though, since it doesn't fit you AGENDA.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
impeccably credible

In 2005 Jenkins became the first woman ever inducted into the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Hall of Fame.

In 1986, Jenkins was part of the team nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for stories about the cocaine-related death of University of Maryland All-American Len Bias.

She is the author of twelve books, four of which were New York Times bestsellers.

Jenkins was born in Fort Worth, Texas, and is a graduate of Stanford University with a degree in English Literature. She lives in New York.
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
53,957
26,717
113
Margaritaville
impeccably credible

In 2005 Jenkins became the first woman ever inducted into the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Hall of Fame.

In 1986, Jenkins was part of the team nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for stories about the cocaine-related death of University of Maryland All-American Len Bias.

She is the author of twelve books, four of which were New York Times bestsellers.

Jenkins was born in Fort Worth, Texas, and is a graduate of Stanford University with a degree in English Literature. She lives in New York.
So what? I never suggested she was a bad journalist.

I think you have missed my thesis. It's not that she's wrong, or that Brady is or isn't guilty. My thesis is simply that you're a deranged lunatic. And a copyright infringer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sluggo69

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
Mike Florio: Goodell's Underling(s) Were Out to Get the Patriots

http://thebiglead.com/2015/06/24/mike-florio-goodell-underlings-were-out-to-get-the-patriots/

“I think that they deliberately delayed the process of getting the real numbers out because having the false numbers out there kept the Patriots feeling like they were on the ropes when the reality was that they were on ropes that weren’t even there,” Florio said. “We didn’t get the truth until May. That is the one fact that bothers me more than anything in this entire ordeal, and that’s the one fact that causes me to believe that someone was out to get the Patriots. The false information was put out there, or deliberately not corrected.”

“As for the science, I think that has been sufficiently debunked by people like the American Enterprise Institute,” Florio said. “We’ve been making the point for weeks now you can’t take four Colts footballs — and that’s the comparison, you’ve got 11 Patriots footballs — and if the real numbers had come out early on, the Patriots would have been able to shout this down as normal application of the Ideal Gas Law. And oh by the way, the NFL is using two different gauges, which differ by up to .45 PSI, which is embarrassing in and of itself.

"The science is bad, the non-scientific evidence is incomplete, and it was all cobbled together in a 243-page report that I believe that Ted Wells believed he was expected to reach. Regardless of whether he was expressly told that, or it was implicit, I believe that Ted Wells thought he was expected to find the Patriots were guilty, and he did the best that he could to come to that conclusion, and ultimately I think what he did wasn’t good enough.”

"


 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
It's a bit refreshing that some national news media are starting to understand that nothing happened. I did a double-take yesterday morning on Mike&Mike when "His and Hers" were guests and Michael Smith said, paraphrasing,

"I read the Wells report, the context report, the AEI study. The scientific evidence has so many holes in it. You have to wonder if Goodell will just do the right thing now and totally erase Brady's punishment'

I'd imagine that sirens and red lights were flashing at ESPN, with voices in the earpieces saying "CODE RED, REPEAT, CODE RED...pro-Patriots talk... everyone... STAY SILENT and we will fade to a commercial break, and then we will discipline Mr. Smith"
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
Sally Jenkins nails it, yet again

Roger Goodell has one credible option on DeflateGate; will he take it?

Roger Goodell can restore a sense of loftiness to the NFL commissioner’s office with a simple expedited decision. He should lift the suspension on Tom Brady this week... sound and logical thinking, so of course Goodell won't listen.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...c12e28-1e76-11e5-bf41-c23f5d3face1_story.html
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
53,957
26,717
113
Margaritaville

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
A sensible sportswriter there in DC.

Joining the growing ranks of prominent national sportwriters who have recognized the truth.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
NFL operations guy and ex-Jet Kensil, son of the Jets president when Belichick resigned as head coach, wanted to catch the Pats, was given a golden opportunity with the Colt's paranoid allegations, but was just too dumb to do any research first and so he wasn't aware the balls would drop PSI in January in Foxboro.

He went to the game and confirmed the 'cheating' at halftime, not realizing the pressure readings were perfectly normal, given the temp. He leaked the information to either the Colts GM or directly to Bob Kraphole Kravitz.

By the next morning the story had already been blown out of proportion. By the end of the next day it was already too late for the NFL to acknowledge they didn't know about the ideal gas law, they would have looked stupid. So to cover Kensil's behind, they had to lie about the actual football pressures ("11 of 12 were 2 psi low") to ESPN's Mortensen, stick by the lie FOR THREE MONTHS, during a sham "investigation".

Pure incompetence and hate. A sting operation by the New York Jets Football League. But like any other big corporate entities, the NYJFL will never admit to any mistake, since they have the funds to cover their errors and do not expect the fight that Brady is about to deliver in court.
 

Zizkov

Moderator
Moderator
Nov 25, 2002
32,443
3,125
113
Prague
  • Like
Reactions: sluggo69

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
Peter King clarifies his opinion: Brady deserves no suspension whatsoever:

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/07/15/brett-favre-packers-divorce-number-retired-nfl/2/

"ON THE BRADY BAN. As a longtime reader of The MMQB, I have noticed that you rarely pass judgment on an issue unless the facts are clear (i.e. you didn’t hammer Kromer too hard for his alleged actions). I am curious, however, if you were in Goodell’s shoes would you reduce Brady’s suspension to one or two games, get rid of it altogether, or leave it as is? The facts are unclear and if the suspension stood Brady would be handed the same punishment as Greg Hardy. (I am a Jets fan and I still don’t think that’s right.) What would you do given the lack of evidence?

—Chris, Stamford, Conn.

What I would have done is I would never have banned Brady in the first place. I don’t think the Wells Report proved that Brady ordered the balls to be deflated. What would I do now? Certainly reduce the sanction to either one or two games, but I’d never be in this position, because I would come up with a different penalty in the first place."

------
Peter has been fully consistent on thinking the Wells report is a bundle of bad science and slanted arguments. He's been clear on that point with me on the phone. His twitter feed has also been pretty clear on that.

It would be a little better if instead of just saying "I don’t think the Wells Report proved that Brady ordered the balls to be deflated" that he also said "I don’t think the Wells Report proved that the balls even WERE deflated" but it's a start.
 

Brockway

Junior
Jan 27, 2012
1,814
1,158
113
Peter King clarifies his opinion: Brady deserves no suspension whatsoever:

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/07/15/brett-favre-packers-divorce-number-retired-nfl/2/

"ON THE BRADY BAN. As a longtime reader of The MMQB, I have noticed that you rarely pass judgment on an issue unless the facts are clear (i.e. you didn’t hammer Kromer too hard for his alleged actions). I am curious, however, if you were in Goodell’s shoes would you reduce Brady’s suspension to one or two games, get rid of it altogether, or leave it as is? The facts are unclear and if the suspension stood Brady would be handed the same punishment as Greg Hardy. (I am a Jets fan and I still don’t think that’s right.) What would you do given the lack of evidence?

—Chris, Stamford, Conn.

What I would have done is I would never have banned Brady in the first place. I don’t think the Wells Report proved that Brady ordered the balls to be deflated. What would I do now? Certainly reduce the sanction to either one or two games, but I’d never be in this position, because I would come up with a different penalty in the first place."

------
Peter has been fully consistent on thinking the Wells report is a bundle of bad science and slanted arguments. He's been clear on that point with me on the phone. His twitter feed has also been pretty clear on that.

It would be a little better if instead of just saying "I don’t think the Wells Report proved that Brady ordered the balls to be deflated" that he also said "I don’t think the Wells Report proved that the balls even WERE deflated" but it's a start.
You talked to Peter King on the phone? Did you already know him previously, or are you such a dweeb that you actually tracked him down to discuss Defl... wait, never mind.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
I contacted several news media by email with my ideal gas law calculations way back BEFORE the Super Bowl. I said that there would be a 1.1-1.3 psi pressure loss expected based upon the weather conditions (which has been confirmed). Florio and King responded, independently. Others in the media did not.
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
53,957
26,717
113
Margaritaville
As I expected (and contrary to the opinions of most here), Tom Brady has no concerns whatsoever about additional discovery, being innocent.

Thus he and the NFLPA will absolutely go to court if any suspension whatsoever remains after Goodell's dog-and-pony show.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...gainst-tom-brady-nflpa-will-fight-it-in-court
Of course he says that. All that article is is a CBS-published NFLPA press release. Please save your posts for genuine news.
 

zeke4ahs

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 26, 2003
34,493
10,725
113
You truly can't be this gullible in real life, can you? How do you survive? He will sue because it will be in courts until he retires. That's pretty obvious, to everyone, but well,you.
 

outside shooter

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Oct 23, 2001
17,333
4,171
113
Brady will sue because he is innocent.

Goodell is not so eager for the lawsuit, because the NFL will have to reveal a very embarrassing factoid about the Wells investigation. The bombshell: The scientific firm hired by Wells, Exponent, was not the first group of scientists employed by Wells and the NFL to analyze the data. The first group of scientists reached a preliminary conclusion that Wells and the NFL found to be unacceptable, favoring the Patriots, so they were relieved of their duties.

Yes, I have corresponded with one of those Ph.D, scientists who was hired and then fired by Wells and his team.
 

TheOriginalHappyGoat

Moderator
Moderator
Oct 4, 2010
53,957
26,717
113
Margaritaville
Brady will sue because he is innocent.

Goodell is not so eager for the lawsuit, because the NFL will have to reveal a very embarrassing factoid about the Wells investigation. The bombshell: The scientific firm hired by Wells, Exponent, was not the first group of scientists employed by Wells and the NFL to analyze the data. The first group of scientists reached a preliminary conclusion that Wells and the NFL found to be unacceptable, favoring the Patriots, so they were relieved of their duties.

Yes, I have corresponded with one of those Ph.D, scientists who was hired and then fired by Wells and his team.
You're like Tom Brady's own personal little Batman, aren't you?