#DeflateGate (Court of Appeals Reinstates Suspension)

[D.o.s.]

There's absolutely no way he can throw the NFL under the bus, though. That's just a reality of where he sits as someone with a job that he ostensibly wants to keep. Any reporter in the country runs with that information based on who gave it to him -- which means, ew, that I agree with Adam Schefter on this, but there's no reasonable way to skewer him over it, rather than being upset with the people who fed him the info (purposefully) in the first place.

Here's another example of that happening via Deflategate:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/30/stephen-a-smith-doesnt-seem-to-realize-he-was-used-by-the-nfl/

[mahonedog88]

There's absolutely no way he can throw the NFL under the bus, though. That's just a reality of where he sits as someone with a job that he ostensibly wants to keep. Any reporter in the country runs with that information based on who gave it to him.

I never said he had to actually give up his source.  I'm not expecting that, no reporter does that.  But the least, THE LEAST, he can do is just simply apologize for that report and admit that he was given wrong information that started this poopstorm.  He has yet to do that.  Heck, the report is still up and free for someone to look at it.  It hasn't even been retracted.

And the whole wanting to keep his job thing I don't buy.  If that's the case, Adam Schefter better start looking for a new job considering on Thursday he suggested that Mort was given false information by one or more high-level NFL official...that sounds a little to me like throwing the NFL under bus.

Again, he doesn't have to reveal who told him this bad info, but the least he can do is man up and admit that he got it wrong, his source got it wrong.  Not every source works out for reporters and sometimes they have to admit that their source was wrong...he hasn't done that yet.

[D.o.s.]

Sure. He can very easily go out and say that he's sorry that he was given bad information and used by the league. In fact that's basically standard procedure when this sort of thing winds up happening.

The fact that he's not doing that probably indicates that this is a source he will need to do his job effectively in the future (which is what I assumed I implied, perhaps not), and a source with enough influence to not only stop him from doing so but also with enough import around the game of professional football that he'd rather just ignore the wailing and wait it out.

[Donoghus]

John Dennis reported this morning that the source was Kensil  (which people have been speculating since pretty much the beginning. 

Does seem like a scumbag move for Mort to pull out last second.  He certainly got used by the NFL here.  My biggest issue is that it was never retracted.  Either ESPN or Mort should've done that a long time ago when it was clear that what was reported was erroneous. 

I do think he is between a rock & a hard place because of his "insider" relationship with the NFL.  He gives up that source (as wrong as they were) and he becomes an outcast.  Which is a death knell for these guys that are "insiders".

[mahonedog88]

Sure. He can very easily go out and say that he's sorry that he was given bad information and used by the league. In fact that's basically standard procedure when this sort of thing winds up happening.

The fact that he's not doing that probably indicates that this is a source he will need to do his job effectively in the future (which is what I assumed I implied, perhaps not), and a source with enough influence to not only stop him from doing so but also with enough import around the game of professional football that he'd rather just ignore the wailing and wait it out.

Or it could just indicate that he's a coward

[D.o.s.]

Sure. He can very easily go out and say that he's sorry that he was given bad information and used by the league. In fact that's basically standard procedure when this sort of thing winds up happening.

The fact that he's not doing that probably indicates that this is a source he will need to do his job effectively in the future (which is what I assumed I implied, perhaps not), and a source with enough influence to not only stop him from doing so but also with enough import around the game of professional football that he'd rather just ignore the wailing and wait it out.

Or it could just indicate that he's a coward

If you're allergic to the nuance at hand, sure.

[Fan from VT]

Very good read:

http://www.stradleylaw.com/deflategate-legal-questions/

[PhoSita]

Sure. He can very easily go out and say that he's sorry that he was given bad information and used by the league. In fact that's basically standard procedure when this sort of thing winds up happening.

The fact that he's not doing that probably indicates that this is a source he will need to do his job effectively in the future (which is what I assumed I implied, perhaps not), and a source with enough influence to not only stop him from doing so but also with enough import around the game of professional football that he'd rather just ignore the wailing and wait it out.

In essence: Roger Goodell.

[kozlodoev]

There's absolutely no way he can throw the NFL under the bus, though.

The NFL is under the bus already. He cites a "league source" on this, and it's obviously incorrect information. So I don't see how saying "my information was bad, I'm sorry" reflects any worse on the league than it already does.

[Donoghus]

There's absolutely no way he can throw the NFL under the bus, though.

The NFL is under the bus already. He cites a "league source" on this, and it's obviously incorrect information. So I don't see how saying "my information was bad, I'm sorry" reflects any worse on the league than it already does.

Exactly.  He doesn't have to give up his incorrect source.  I understand that he might want to keep that confidential for his career sake. 

My issue has always been that no one ever came out & retracted it or just said "it was a screw up".

[mahonedog88]

There's absolutely no way he can throw the NFL under the bus, though.

The NFL is under the bus already. He cites a "league source" on this, and it's obviously incorrect information. So I don't see how saying "my information was bad, I'm sorry" reflects any worse on the league than it already does.

Exactly.  He doesn't have to give up his incorrect source.  I understand that he might want to keep that confidential for his career sake. 

My issue has always been that no one ever came out & retracted it or just said "it was a screw up".

That's all I'm saying

[Vermont Green]

There's absolutely no way he can throw the NFL under the bus, though.

The NFL is under the bus already. He cites a "league source" on this, and it's obviously incorrect information. So I don't see how saying "my information was bad, I'm sorry" reflects any worse on the league than it already does.

I don't blame Mortensen on this.  He received some information and reported it.  I guess as a journalist, you have some responsibility to confirm this type of thing but it would have been hard for him to do that.  It is still not clear how many balls if any were actually deflated so what can he say?  What is the truth?  He might say something that is no more true than his last report.  He is a dweeb for hiding on this but he is not even close to the being the real issue.  Even if he did some full retraction or apology, would it do any good?

What I think is more telling is this is what the league believed.  They really bought the narrative that x balls were deflated.  The league thought they had something, got so excited there were probably wet pants in the league office, rushed to leak it out, and have been in damage control mode ever since.

The league botched this.  Now that is something you will never hear Mortensen say.

[footey]

Nope it's because I actually have read everything including both court filings and the report cover to back.  I suggest you do the same.  He devil is in the details, regardless of he nfl wanting to reduce it to headlines.

And you and other Patriots fans have interpreted it the way you (plural) wanted. I've seen those interpretations in this thread. They're quite amusing.

Evidence is that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.

If you have yet to see any - as per your assertion - then you simply don't understand the word. You may not believe such evidence; you may think that the evidence gathered is sufficient enough to warrant the punishment; you may be swayed by other evidence that refutes the assertions in the Wells report; but in the end there is evidence - a considerable amount in fact -  that the Patriots and Tom Brady conspired to cheat by deflating footballs.

I'm a New England sports fan. But I also believe in playing by the rules. I think the preponderance of the evidence suggest that the Patriots didn't play by the rules and quite possibly "won" another tainted Super Bowl because they cheated (again). At this point, the Patriots can enjoy the rings but history will always remember that they were "won" because they were cheating (hence the quotes). That's sad. What's worse is that I find the excuses made by the fans just as sad. The ends do not justify the means.

Now, back to the points at hand. I said that Kraft would accept his penalty. He did. I said Brady would get suspended. He did. Now I am saying I think Brady will lose in court. And should he do so, I think that will reflect poorly on his legacy. He could have meekly taken the penalty without admitting his guilt and he probably would have had his penalty reduced to two games. He would have gotten a pass for just being a team player and "taking one for the team". This saga would be over and done with. And frankly with a weak AFC East the Patriots could have gotten by without him for two games. But by fighting this, he creates a disruption for the team and uncertainty going into the season. Should he lose - which I think is the more likely scenario - he hurts the team and his own legacy far worse than he would have otherwise. If Brady loses in court, the Patriots start out 1-3 and end up missing the playoffs at 9-7 or 10-6, his image in Boston will never be the same.

No offense here, but I highly doubt you are a NE Patriots fan, because if you were, you would not make that statement.  Don't need to be to express your opinions, but when you said you are a New England sports fan, does that include the Pats?  Or are you being cute with your language??

[footey]

All fabulous points. And still people are hung up on the Brady phone thing, but somehow miss the fact that if Brady told Jastremski and McNally to deflate the balls via text or email, they would have already seen these messages on J and M's phones.

And if they are really trying to see what Brady may have said to other people, it's just preposterous. Imagine you got in trouble at work and your employer wanted to see your non work phone and read messages to non work people?

I really hope that not only does Brady win, but that this leads to the end of Roger Goodell's tenure:

Actually, the points are irrelevant. Even if Brady was 100% innocent - and that is quite hard to believe with the evidence against him - he could still be suspended for not cooperating. Destroying his phone is exceptionally powerful evidence of that, even if the New England Echo Chamber wants to try to excuse that with the same feeble excuses they've used for dismissing all of the other evidence.

Now a corporation cannot force you to turn over private messages. For one the NFL does not have subpena power so Brady is under no obligation from the law to give over his phone which, is a good thing. A corporation should not have that power.

What a corporation can do is assume the worst if you don’t cooperate and issue punishments based on that worst assumptions. You may be asked to take a drug test because the company suspects you of being high on the job. You may refuse, which is your right. But then the company can then fire you because they can assume that since you wouldn’t take a drug test you probably had been using some illicit drugs. If IBM was accusing me of sharing trade secrets with Toshiba, they could request to see my phone, if I didn’t comply, they have the right to fire me in most states.

No player has ever been suspended for not cooperating with an investigation, in fact the former commissioner vacated an pensltys enforced against saints players  for not cooperating because it was not inline with the cba

Additionally what evidence is there that Brady did anything,  I have yet to see any

There's 120+ pages in this thread. There's 243 pages in the Wells report. If you have yet to see any evidence that's because you refuse to see any. As such, it would be futile to rehash the factual and circumstantial evidence surrounding this case.

If you are relying on the Wells report as the evidence, I could not disagree more strongly. Subsequent, objectively prepared, scientific reports have torn that to shreds.  I am a Pats fan, and felt somewhat sanEdited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.ged by Brady for the destruction of his phone. But as I read more context, I am totally confused by what the heck happened.  I think the fact that it will be heard in a NY court will likely have it decided in the NFL's favor, and we can all go for closure. But I doubt that we will ever find out whether or not there really was any tampering of the footballs that day.

[footey]

And still people are hung up on the Brady phone thing, but somehow miss the fact that if Brady told Jastremski and McNally to deflate the balls via text or email, they would have already seen these messages on J and M's phones.

Did they do a full forensic analysis on J's and M's phones to see if messages were deleted, etc.?

Unlikely that any deleted texts from Brady, because they would have shown up in the transcript he provided. If you mean between them, I have no idea.