(
MyFoxBoston.com) -- Tom Brady's agent issued a statement on the Wells Deflategate report, calling it "a significant and terrible disappointment."
Brady's agent, Don Yee, said that the report contained "significant and tragic flaws," adding that "the investigators' assumptions and inferences are easily debunked or subject to multiple interpretations."
The report, released Wednesday, found it probable that the Patriots deliberately deflated the balls used in the AFC Championship game and that Brady was at least generally aware of the rules violation.
FOX25's Kerry Kavanaugh sat down with Michael McCann, University of New Hampshire sports law professor and Sports Illustrated writer, to examine the language.
He says it immediately points out the limitations of the NFL's investigation.
"Because this is an independent investigation there's no subpoena power. There's no ability to have witnesses testify under oath," he said.
And, the letter states much of Brady's side of the story is omitted.
But, for some, the response is incomplete.
"Why not a denial. There is no denial in this statement," he said. "I think a statement saying Tom Brady didn't do anything wrong would be stronger. But the problem with that is people can say well look at these text messages."
McCann says this is a public relations move, but does plant seeds for what could come next.
"If he's punished by a fine, my guess is that we don't see much," he said. "If Tom Brady is suspended, then I think it ratchets up rather what his response could be."
Full statement below:"The Wells report, with all due respect, is a significant and terrible disappointment. It's omission of key facts and lines of inquiry suggest the investigators reached a conclusion first, and then determined so-called facts later. One fact alone taints this entire report. What does it say about the league office's protocols and ethics when it allows one team to tip it off to an issue prior to a championship game, and no league officials or game officials notified the Patriots of the same issue prior to the game? This suggests it may be more probable than not that the league cooperated with the Colts in perpetrating a sting operation. The Wells report buries this issue in a footnote on page 46 without any further elaboration. The league is a significant client of the investigators' law firm; it appears to be a rich source of billings and media exposure based on content in the law firm's website. This was not an independent investigation and the contents of the report bear that out – all one has to do is read closely and critically, as opposed to simply reading headlines. The investigators' assumptions and inferences are easily debunked or subject to multiple interpretations. Much of the report's vulnerabilities are buried in the footnotes, which is a common legal writing tactic. It is a sad day for the league as it has abdicated the resolution of football-specific issues to people who don't understand the context or culture of the sport. I was physically present for my client's interview. I have verbatim notes of the interview. Tom made himself available for nearly an entire day and patiently answered every question. It was clear to me the investigators had limited understanding of professional football. For reasons unknown, the Wells report omitted nearly all of Tom's testimony, most of which was critical because it would have provided this report with the context that it lacks. Mr. Wells promised back in January to share the results of this investigation publicly, so why not follow through and make public all of the information gathered and let the public draw its own conclusions? This report contains significant and tragic flaws, and it is common knowledge in the legal industry that reports like this generally are written for the benefit of the purchaser."
