LOVERRO: Claims of a conflict of interest don’t seem to matter in NFL investigations

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Tom Brady, among the mountain of responses and briefs his army of lawyers have filed to fight the NFL’s suspension for his use of underinflated footballs, has argued that the report prepared by Ted Wells was flawed in part because it was not an “independent” investigation.

That’s rich, since his boss, New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, didn’t seem to have a problem with the “independence” of another NFL report.

When the Robert Mueller report was released in Ray Rice’s domestic violence case, Kraft rose to the defense of commissioner Roger Goodell and the league against charges that the Mueller investigation — which let Goodell off the hook for a cover-up about what they knew and when they knew it — was compromised because Mueller, like Wells, had been on the league’s payroll.

When asked about the Mueller report and the questions surrounding the conflict of interest in the Rice probe, Kraft said Goodell “felt he made a mistake. He corrected it before anything came out.”

In Kraft’s eyes, the Mueller report was the correction.

If Brady insists that the Wells report was a conflict, it would appear that his owner would not be in his corner on that issue, since he shot it down during the Rice investigation.

Of course, he could say he was all right with that conflict and not this one. Kraft stood with Goodell then.

Now he stands with Rachel Nichols. Last September, Nichols, reporting for CNN, called into doubt the NFL’s “independent” investigations by questioning Goodell publicly in a press conference. Acknowleding that Mueller, the former director of the FBI, has negotiated television deals for the league through his law firm, Nichols wanted to know why Goodell would hire someone with those connections.

“Part of the idea of this, I guess, is to restore public trust,” Goodell said, emphasizing the FBI connection.

I guess Kraft would now stand up at that press conference and tell Goodell where he could stuff that public trust.

Mueller’s credentials are impressive, but so are Wells’. He has a law degree and an MBA from Harvard, and is considered one of the most successful defense attorneys in America. His clients have included such prominent names as Eliot Spitzer and Scooter Libby.

Wells once served as the treasurer for former Sen. Bill Bradley’s presidential campaign in 2000.

Bradley swears by Wells’ intelligence and integrity. “Four times I’ve offered him a job,” Bradley told Sports Illustrated. “But he’s too good at what he does. He turned me down three times.”

Now? We think Wells is incompetent. He is being accused of being a puppet of the NFL.

Wells’ report calls into question any and all of the so-called “independent” league investigations. If we think the Wells report on Brady was compromised, then why not Mueller’s investigation of Rice?

“We found no evidence that anyone at the NFL had or saw the in-elevator video before it was publicly shown,” Mueller said in a press release when his report was issued. “We also found no evidence that a woman at the NFL acknowledged receipt of that video in a voicemail message on April 9, 2014.”

Why shouldn’t we believe that Mueller’s investigation is full of hot air? Because Kraft validated it in his defense of Goodell — the same owner who has since ridiculed the Wells report?

Mueller has cashed the same NFL checks that Wells has, and the same questions that are now being raised about the Brady report should be revisited for the Rice investigation.

Why should we believe any of it?

• Thom Loverro is co-host of “The Sports Fix,” noon to 2 p.m. daily on ESPN 980 and espn980.com.