It took 243 pages for Ted Wells to attempt to summarize his 31⁄2-month Deflategate investigation. All that paper, so little proof, and yet so much shade thrown at Tom Brady.

Wells should at least have the decency to use two-ply next time.

There were so many holes in the investigation, and the presumptive tone of the actual report appeared to cover up a lack of damning evidence.

Yet, Wells immediately set the tenor of the report in just the fourth paragraph of the opening section by writing, “It is more probable than not that New England Patriots personnel participated in violations of the Playing Rules and were involved in a deliberate effort to circumvent the rules.” Wells also suggested it was “more probable than not” that Patriots equipment assistant John Jastremski and officials locker room attendant Jim McNally deliberately deflated the footballs, and Brady “was at least generally aware” of their actions.

Well, with hard evidence like that, lock him up and throw the key in a volcano.

But wait, buried on the 228th page was this nugget: “In sum, the data did not provide a basis for us to determine with absolute certainty whether there was or was not tampering as the analysis of such data ultimately is dependent upon assumptions and information that is not certain.”

No wonder Patriots owner Robert Kraft said Wells’ findings were “incomprehensible” in a statement that ripped the report.

Maybe Brady and the Patriots are guilty. Maybe they aren’t. But it’s more probable than not there is a lack of consistency and credibility with Wells’ investigation.

For starters, referee Walt Anderson, who worked the AFC Championship Game between the Patriots and Colts, was revered by Wells for his attention to detail during his preparation for each game.

“Anderson is one of the few referees who personally tests the inflation levels of game balls prior to the game, rather than delegating that responsibility to another member of his officiating crew,” the report stated.

So, it sounds like most refs don’t handle these checks, which validates the belief there is no universal system in place to measure the air pressure. Also, for such a diligent referee, Anderson doesn’t remember whether he tested the Patriots or Colts footballs first, and Anderson couldn’t recall if he properly initialed kicking ball No. 1 prior to the game.

Also, though Anderson didn’t record the pressure measurements before the game, he claimed to remember all but two of the Patriots’ balls were at least 12.5 psi, and “most of the Colts game balls tested by Anderson prior to the game measured 13.0 or 13.1 psi, although one or two footballs may have registered 12.8 or 12.9 psi.”

Most? One or two? May have? That was apparently good enough for Wells.

“We credit Anderson’s recollection of the pregame measurements taken on the day of the AFC Championship Game based on both the level of confidence Anderson expressed in his recollection and the consistency of his recollection with information provided by each of the Patriots and Colts regarding their target inflation levels,” Wells wrote.

Then, the footballs were tested at halftime by alternate officials Clete Blakeman and Dyrol Prioleau, but not Anderson. All 11 of the Patriots’ footballs fell below the required 12.5 psi on both gauges. Only four Colts balls were checked, allegedly due to time constraints, and three were below 12.5 psi on Prioleau’s gauge. But that’s not how Wells spun it.

“Each of the four Colts balls tested measured within the permissible 12.5 to 13.5 psi range on at least one of the gauges,” Wells wrote.

And what’s up with the time constraints? The rules are either a priority or they aren’t. But maybe this is traced back to the eve of the game when Colts general manager Ryan Grigson emailed the NFL Operations Department to state it is “well known around the league” that Pats ball boys deflate balls, but Grigson offered no proof. Anderson was then advised Saturday and Sunday to follow proper protocols, but the Patriots weren’t made aware of anything until midway through the game.

The report also heavily harped on text messages between McNally and Jastremski, which theoretically should be nothing more than hearsay, but Wells accepted them anyway and subjectively discredited the pair’s explanation for potentially incriminating conversations.

Jastremski texted McNally, “Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done.”

Jastremski and McNally, who jokingly referred to himself as “the deflator” in a previous text exchange before the start of last season, both said they were referring to Jastremski’s friend who was trying to resell tickets for a game. But Wells offered a confusing reason to shoot down that claim.

Jastremski also mentioned he would leave a needle for McNally along with some signed memorabilia from Brady. They told Wells the needle would be for the officials for both the gauge and pump, but Wells retorted, “We do not view these explanations as plausible or consistent with common sense.”

Can this be considered an objective investigation when Wells is taking blatant shots at the notion of the subjects’ common sense without even sniffing any evidence of an actual needle?

And heaven forbid Brady declined to turn over his phone records for Wells’ review. By the way Wells repeatedly mentioned that anecdote, it sounded more like he was complaining to Maury Povich than writing a book report.

Here’s another good one. When NFL senior vice president of football operations David Gardi informed the Patriots of the investigation the morning after the game, Gardi said one of the Pats’ balls was measured at 10.1 psi. Not only was that absurdly low, it was blatantly false.

Wells didn’t seem to mind.

“We do not believe that this error raises any doubt about the accuracy of the measurements recorded by (the officials at halftime) or any other relevant issue,” Wells wrote.

There were other discrepancies, too. Wells said the story broke with WTHR.com columnist Bob Kravitz’ tweet at 9:55 p.m., which was seven minutes before the game ended. The tweet actually was published at 12:55 a.m.

And similar to the way Wells felt scorned over Brady’s unwillingness to share his phone, Wells wouldn’t let it go that the Patriots declined to make McNally available for a follow-up interview. Wells never mentioned they already interviewed McNally four times.

But would Wells let the facts get in the way of a good story? Apparently, that’s also more probable than not.