This NFL 'investigation' of Tom Brady looks more like a total hose job with every passing day

As later acknowledged in the report (pgs. 44-45. Ongoing page references are to the pages of the original version of the Wells Report, not to the Executive Summary and these annotations), the Colts actually raised their concern with Senior League officials David Gardi and Mike Kensil the day before the game. Mr. Kensil then forwarded the Colts concerns to James Daniel, the NFL Director of Operations and to Dean Blandino and Alberto Riverton, senior members of the NFL Officiating Department. They, in turn, passed the concerns along to Walt Anderson, the Referee assigned to the game. The League, as is its prerogative, chose not to convey that concern to the Patriots. In pre-game preparations, the League did not consider either the impact of weather on psi or any preventative steps which could have been taken. Nor did the League decide to record in writing the pre-game measurements. The Colts, in expressing their concerns, never asked for any such added pre-game vigilance, instead suggesting that: “It would be great if someone would be able to check the air in the game footballs as the game goes on . . .” (pg. 45). As a result, at halftime, members of the officiating crew assigned to the game, overseen by a senior officiating supervisor from the National Football League (the “NFL” or the “League”), tested the air pressure of footballs being used by each of the Patriots and the Colts. All eleven of the Patriots game balls tested measured below the minimum pressure level of 12.5 pounds per square inch (“psi”) allowed by Rule 2 of the Official Playing Rules of the National Football League (the “Playing Rules”) on both of two air pressure gauges used to test the balls. The four Colts balls tested each measured within the 12.5 to 13.5 psi range permitted under the Playing Rules on at least one of the gauges used for the tests. This statement is not complete. Halftime psi measurements are on pg. 8. The reality is that, on the second gauge, 3 of 4 Colts footballs were below regulation. A more accurate and complete statement regarding the Colts footballs would have been: “Using two different gauges (one of which was used for pre-game psi measurements), the League tested only four Colts footballs at halftime. Three of those footballs measured below regulation on the so-called “non-Logo” gauge. Four measured at or above regulation on the so-called “Logo” gauge. One Colts football averaged below regulation when taking into account both gauges. As soon as that fourth Colts football was measured, League personnel stopped any further gauging of Colts footballs. Relying on the higher Logo gauge measurements of the Colts football, League officials decided not to add air to any of the Colts footballs. Additional measurements using the same two gauges were made post-game. Post-game, each of the four Patriots footballs measured were well above the required level of 12.5 psi on both gauges (including one that had been overinflated to 13.65 on the Logo gauge). Three of the four Colts footballs measured below 12.5 psi on the non-Logo gauge (a violation of League rules), one measured below 12.5 psi on both gauges (also a violation), and three Colts footballs measured above 12.5 on the Logo gauge.”

The report relies on the increased level of communications between Mr. Brady and Mr. Jastremski in the days following the AFC Championship Game even though these communications show no knowledge of football tampering. As fully explained to the investigators, there were several readily understandable reasons for increased communications between Mr. Brady and Mr. Jastremski in the days following the AFC Championship Game. First, the media frenzy over deflated footballs started the day after the AFC Championship Game. Mr. Brady is used to the limelight and to critics; Mr. Jastremski is not. Since Mr. Jastremski prepared the footballs, it was reasonable to expect that this media attention would focus on him. It was also reasonable to expect that (as happened) Mr. Jastremski’s boss would question Mr. Jastremski to see what, if anything, he knew. Mr. Brady’s reaching out to Mr. Jastremski to see how he was holding up in these circumstances is not only understandable, but commendable. Second, the team had just won the AFC Championship and was headed to the Super Bowl. Footballs needed to be prepared for the Super Bowl. Since this was Mr. Jastremski’s first Super Bowl experience since assuming the role as game football preparer, it is not surprising he and Mr. Brady spoke a lot about football preparation during the days after the AFC Championship Game. Issues that they needed to discuss included: how footballs would be prepared (there were several different ways used for preparation during the season, sometimes dependent on weather); how many more than the required number for the game should be prepared so that, as he always does, Mr. Brady could select game footballs from among a larger number of prepared footballs; when, if at all, would the footballs be available in Foxborough for practice; when were they to be sent to Arizona; when would they be available for use in practice in Arizona; etc. All of these discussion topics were triggered by winning the AFC Championship and needed to be dealt with in the days following that win. The investigators could have inquired of the Patriots former employee whose responsibility included preparing game balls whether his communications with Mr. Brady had increased during the time period leading up to the prior Super Bowls. They did not. In short, increased Brady-Jastremski communications in the days following the AFC Championship Game do not make it more likely than not that there was any wrongdoing or knowledge of wrongdoing. They are totally consistent with complete innocence. It is only speculation to conclude otherwise. Nonetheless, it forms part of the report’s stated rationale for its findings against Mr. Brady.

"Independent investigator my #," Turner said. And that might be the nicest thing Turner said about Wells. "Wells is not a good human being," Turner said. "When I did not give him the story he wanted, he targeted me as a part of a problem in Miami. He's not an independent investigator. He's not looking at both sides of the situation." According to Turner, Wells left out a lot of facts in his Dolphins report, including the fact that Martin is suicidal. In his interview with SiriusXM, Turner gave a full explanation of the situation with Martin, a situation that started in May 2013. . . . Turner claims that Wells left the suicide part of Turner's testimony out of the report in order to "protect" Martin. "They left that out of the report. I told the investigators the whole story, just like I'm telling you," Turner said. "It was just clear to me when I read the report how Richie Incognito was railroaded and then I got railroaded along with him." Incognito was suspended for the second half of the 2013 season and then wasn't re-signed by the Dolphins. "They were protecting Jon Martin and they had no problem dragging Richie Incognito through the mud and it was irresponsible of them," Turner said. Turner doesn't trust Wells and he thinks it was smart of Tom Brady not to trust Wells either. "One thing that stands out to me is just how smart Tom Brady is. He didn't trust the Wells report. He didn't trust Wells," Turner said. "If he did then he would have complied a little more."

The NFLPA informed Vincent and Goodell of its plan to call them both as witnesses to the appeal, specifically to discuss the delegation of disciplinary authority that it considers a violation of the CBA, as well as an alleged "sting operation" set up to entrap Brady and the Patriots. Because of this, the NFLPA believes that Goodell -- or "anyone with close ties to the NFL" -- cannot serve as arbitrator for Brady's appeal. In light of the above, the NFLPA believes that neither Commissioner Goodell nor anyone with close ties to the NFL can serve as arbitrator in Mr. Brady's appeal under governing legal standards. The credibility and testimony of both you and Commissioner Goodell will be at issue in the hearing as well as numerous procedural issues regarding your testimony and the testimony of the Commissioner. Thus, this matter is similar to the Rice appeal, where Commissioner Goodell properly concluded that a neutral with no ties to the League, Judge Barbara Jones, should be appointed as Hearing Officer to afford Mr. Rice a lawful hearing before an impartial and to maintain the integrity of the proceedings. Given that Goodell has recently delegated the appeals of Adrian Peterson and Greg Hardy to an independent arbitrator, it was seen as a bit of a departure from form when news broke that he would hear Brady's appeal himself. It is felt in some circles that Goodell hearing the appeal would give Brady greater ammo should he eventually take the case to court, given precedent established in the Rice case and others.

Support Canada Free Press

VIEW Comments