Which report?

I read the Wells report, yes.

I have turned off local sports radio for the most part, because the yahoos are too much handle, and the haters are just idiots spewing the mainstream lies.

The science is only "proof" if ignore Walt Anderson's statement that he thinks he used the logo gage. But that would be odd, because they aren't ignoring his memory regarding the ball psi before kickoff. No, they ignore the facts that don't fit the preconceived conclusion.

It truly is a cluster f*ck and handled poorly.

But my comments in no way reflect an "mainstream media reports" as you suggest.

In fact, the media is now ignoring the science and focusing on the phone. It's a moving target.

The "nfl said it is ok for Brady to destroy his phone" mantra came from somewhere but nowhere factual that I can tell.

Speaking of moving targets is there some sort of science behind the nfl approving of Brady destroying his phone?🇨🇮

A portion of Tom Brady's response. From him (his lawyer probably) on his own site:

I also disagree with yesterdays narrative surrounding my cellphone. I replaced my broken Samsung phone with a new iPhone 6 AFTER my attorneys made it clear to the NFL that my actual phone device would not be subjected to investigation under ANY circumstances. As a member of a union, I was under no obligation to set a new precedent going forward, nor was I made aware at any time during Mr. Wells investigation, that failing to subject my cell phone to investigation would result in ANY discipline.

Most importantly, I have never written, texted, emailed to anybody at anytime, anything related to football air pressure before this issue was raised at the AFC Championship game in January. To suggest that I destroyed a phone to avoid giving the NFL information it requested is completely wrong.

To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested. We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing. There is no “smoking gun” and this controversy is manufactured to distract from the fact they have zero evidence of wrongdoing

He refused to give up his phone.

Who knows what was on it? Naked Giselle pics. Swear words to make his mom unhappy. Curses about Belichick. A gay lover.

It doesn't matter, because he had a right to refuse it.

And he took it further by giving all the documents he could get and handed them over to Wells.

Further discussions about this aspect of Brady's statement revealed that Brady's camp did tell them it was destroyed. Knowing Goodell, like the Ray Rice video they'll have no record of this. But does that even matter? We're talking TEXT messages and here's a little know fact about texts: The person receiving them has record on their phone. And the equipment dudes phones were NFL property via the Patriots. And they DID give up their phones. So why would Brady's texts be any different? Why is the status of his phone with his personal information of concern?

By the way, it's well documented now as positive proof that the NFL leaked lies to the media.

Is that the organization you want snooping through your private phone records and pics? Get real folks. He did what anyone would do.

Actually, they shouldn't be in too much trouble.

I don't know the legal mumbo jumbo like I do the science aspect, but I believe the courts will only be ruling on whether Goodell was right to remain as arbitrator and if he did so fairly.

The CBA with the NFLPA and the league gives him that authority. But he may have over stepped it. And in my non-legal opinion he did so by changing the target.

He's basically saying that Brady's obstruction is the main issue, rather than trying to prove the ball psi thingy.

It's past a level of ridiculousness on how the NFL handled this. If they were concerned about league integrity, they should have handled this at a professional level.

The closest thing I can equate to this situation would be a quality control document issued on products made. Nobody would take the operators word for it that the product was within specification. Yet the Wells reports accepts Walt Anderson as trustworthy. Except when he says he used the Logo Guage. Then they claim he's mistaken.

It's awesome in it's inconsistency. Yet it merits $1MM, two draft picks, and 4 games.

But I'm a biased yahoo, so what do I know?

All that is nice, but it does not support your statement in post 35. That's the problem. It's scattershot hoping something sticks. You stated the NFL said it was ok to destroy the phone. They didn't according to the only record that has to stand up in court right now.

What you smugly call a fact simply isn't.

I am sincere when I say I appreciate your blind loyalty. I'm not being sarcastic. I value loyalty and am extremely loyal to my friends and family. I bet you are too.

Actually, it is a fact that this was part of the post Brady Statement rebuttal. Locally, this was the only thing interesting on the news. In a conversation with Adam Schefter when he was trying to somewhat defend Chris Mortenson, this issue was brought up and was never disputed by anyone.

I wasn't there, so I can't say how it happened, but it's obvious that the NFL yelled "look! something shiney!" and you got distracted from the ONLY thing that really matters: Whether the balls were deflated and whether Brady knew.

By the way I thought you were the one giving Zrx crap about the mainstream media. I agree which is why it's worth going to source documents and things of record rather than Schaefer or mort.

Not sarcastic, but condescending. Hence the "blind" part.

Go back to when this first broke. I was pissed at Brady when Mortenson's report came out. I figured he cheated when he obviously did need to. I said so on these boards. That's not blind loyalty.

Only when the dust settled and the numbers revealed themselves did I go back to supporting them. Because the numbers don't show any signs of cheating.

Yet the NFL refused to accept this.

I trust the words of Tom Brady's camp over the NFL, and if history is any indicator then I am right to do so. Brady has never been involved with anything underhanded but the NFL in the past year alone has been proven to be a bunch of liars.

Choose those who you trust with a level of suspicion commensurate with their actions.

I really don't mean it as condescending. I suppose I see how you could. I do think you are blind. My wife is blind and finds me attractive because she loves me. That's truly blind and I'm glad 😁 I don't trust the NFL or the Brady/Pats camp. Honestly Brady's story doesn't add up. I had a similar incident with my college age daughter whose story had too many convenient holes and coincidences (like deleting emails and emptying the trash on the day I asked for them etc). I'd never accept the line of bs Tom is giving from anyone. As for his history, much of the world would disagree with you.

You like Tom and the pats. Cool.

At any rate you will never be convinced no matter what the outcome which is cool. Plausible deniability makes for fun unsolvable debate. The demand for 100% proof can not be over rated.

Hittin the hay. Thanks for the fun.

Brady has played 15 years without any issues, on or off field. Yet you say there is history because"much of world" thinks so?

Brady is the centerpeice on a team that while you refuse to accept it has a history of questionable actions and coverup/deceipt within the game. I understand your defense of them, and the denial of past events, even to the point of creating "facts" like the leage gave Brady the ok to destroy his phone. We've been down those paths. You are normally more careful in your arguments except when it comes to the Pats. It is hard when you are so bias towards something. So bias that you assume everyone disagreeing with you has as strong of feelings about it as you do.

You are in love with them. You will beleive them no matter what. They rely on that and I'm glad you are going all Tammy Wynette. sniff sniff it's really quite beautiful in a greek tradgedy sort of way. It's making me a little misty.

So I ask for specifics and get a broads general view. I mean a general broad view.

Honestly TW, it's like you wear the fence sitter title with honor.

Brady is on Belichicks team, therefore his history is questionable?

That's something I expect from a no brained hater.

You harp on the phone smash, but the fact is that I give you specifics. If you feel they're incorrect at least we can discuss it. You give nothing but innuendo and hearsay. It ruins the flow of the discussion and quite honestly makes one wonder about either your intent or your intelligence. I'll assume it's the former, but I can't say it's a "fact" lest I give you another reason to change the direction of the conversation because you've got even less than the NFL in terms of proof.

And good morning to you, sir.