Troy Vincent criticizes NFLPA spending on legal action

[jrry32]

So why is the science in the Wells report wrong? If scientist disagree then there no proof the Wells report is accurate.

Well, there is proof that the science in the Wells Report is accurate. It's the report itself. But the science in the Wells Report is pretty much irrelevant when the other evidence comes into play.

Deflator could mean he deflates balls from 13.5 to 12.5. No proof he is under deflating and based on the AEI report this is proven out. There is no proof of any wrong doing, there is plenty of reasonable doubt.

Reasonable doubt is irrelevant. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a criminal law standard. This is preponderance of the evidence. It only needs to be proven more likely than not. Basically, to make it numerical, more likely than not means more than 50% chance it happened. Beyond a reasonable doubt is like an 85% to 90% chance it happened.(although, you're not allowed to actually use numbers in court)

Obviously, more likely than not is far easier to prove. And it's all the Wells Report has to prove.

Vincent is off based. Take a look at the suspensions handed out. Ray Rice, MacDonald, AP, Brady. Because the NFL hands out suspensions without proof or facts sometimes they open themselves to lawsuits for unfair punishments. If players didn't have to worry about 4 game suspensions for smoking a joint or suspended for being accused of something there might not be so many lawsuits against the NFL. Also for the record Kessler has a pretty good record when suing the NFL.

Rice and Peterson...I totally agree with them going to court. Brady? Nope.

If players don't want to worry about a four game suspension for smoking a joint, don't smoke a joint.

Vincent should worry more about how the NFL handles punishment and not how the players defend themselves. if the NFL handled things better then the players would not have to spend money to right a wrong and could put that money to better use like he suggested.

Except Vincent and the NFL were right to punish the Patriots and Brady.

 

[Boston Ram]

Well, there is proof that the science in the Wells Report is accurate. It's the report itself. But the science in the Wells Report is pretty much irrelevant when the other evidence comes into play.



Reasonable doubt is irrelevant. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a criminal law standard. This is preponderance of the evidence. It only needs to be proven more likely than not. Basically, to make it numerical, more likely than not means more than 50% chance it happened. Beyond a reasonable doubt is like an 85% to 90% chance it happened.(although, you're not allowed to actually use numbers in court)

Obviously, more likely than not is far easier to prove. And it's all the Wells Report has to prove.



Rice and Peterson...I totally agree with them going to court. Brady? Nope.

If players don't want to worry about a four game suspension for smoking a joint, don't smoke a joint.



Except Vincent and the NFL were right to punish the Patriots and Brady.

Ok I'm done lol. Your opinion is slanted so far one way the you don't give credence to anything that does not fit your opinion.

 

[jrry32]

Ok I'm done lol. Your opinion is slanted so far one way the you don't give credence to anything that does not fit your opinion.

You're right. I'm not going to lend credence to a study by three random guys (who are economists and not physicists) when the text messages and the inflation level of the balls already have proven the case.

 

[Boston Ram]

You're right. I'm not going to lend credence to a study by three random guys (who are economists and not physicists) when the text messages and the inflation level of the balls already have proven the case.

This kind of proves my point. AEI is not about 3 random guys. There findings were read by the NFL for bountygate. The players suspensions were later vacated. Also only 1 of the researches were an economist. So clearly the NFL respects their work. Go to the AEI website before dismissing their findings. Quite frankly I think their work speaks for itself, so don't blow it off as there are a bunch of kids in a basement. Their findings state that the PSI of the footballs scientifically were where they should be.

But again you have made up your mind that their guilty so you will not listen to facts that don agree with your agenda.

I am done this time. Have a great 4th

 

[jrry32]

This kind of proves my point. AEI is not about 3 random guys. There findings were read by the NFL for bountygate. The players suspensions were later vacated. Also only 1 of the researches were an economist. So clearly the NFL respects their work. Go to the AEI website before dismissing their findings. Quite frankly I think their work speaks for itself, so don't blow it off as there are a bunch of kids in a basement. Their findings state that the PSI of the footballs scientifically were where they should be.

But again you have made up your mind that their guilty so you will not listen to facts that don agree with your agenda.

I am done this time. Have a great 4th

As I told you, you're right. I made up my mind when I read the guy call himself "the deflator" and then threaten jokingly to go to ESPN. That did it for me. It was over at that point.

I don't care what their theoretical conclusions are. They weren't the only people that did a report. They aren't experts in the field. And the Patriots' balls were WELL below the threshold. That's all I need to see. I don't need science trying to explain why it could be. We have overwhelming evidence from the text messages that explain EXACTLY HOW it happened.

No, two of the researchers are economists. They are experts in economics. I have no idea about the third guy (Sullivan). Whereas one of the people consulted in the Wells Report is a Professor of PHYSICS at Princeton.

I'm sorry, Boston, but I'm not going to be swayed by AEI. There is disagreement over the science and the AEI people don't possess expert credentials in the field of physics.