Lets Ponder the Patriots Deflationgate Issue

[DFWJC]

I think you are confusing "recording" with measurement.

It has been confirmed the Walt Anderson did "gauge" all of the footballs pre game. They then are marked if they passed without the psi listed (that is the recorded part you refer to). But they certainly were gauged and Anderson and the refs did know the exact psi in the balls.

People can cloud all they want, the Pats balls left the refs legal and became illegal. The Colts balls left legal and stayed legal. The reinflated footballs at halftime stayed legal also.

Yeah, I know they recorded if they passed or fail with a ball mark. I'm not confused on that.
I was saying that they did not write down the exact psi for each ball and were not required to do so. In other words, a passed ball that gets checked could be anywhere between roughly 12.5-13.5 psi. That's all they needed to know.

And yes, the facts according to the refs are that the balls 2 hours before the game were approved and by halftime, the Pats balls were below standard while the Colts' balls were not.
True.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

You need to calm the hell down and stop accusing me personally of stuff.

Nobody is assuming ANYTHING and nobody said they were for sure saying 2 psi below 13.5.

ALL I was saying is that there is one more area that can be used to add vagueness...right or wrong.

I could give flying crap who is guilty or not here. I've just been pointing out the things that WILL be brought up--be it a smokescreen or not.

I have been right every single time so far that the topic has been brought up. If there's any place to raise a flag, they will.

I AM NOT TAKING SIDES. I'm 100% for not , nor ever have been! a Pats fan.
Stop making this personal

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Based on the Pats own statements and desires, they would have gave the footballs to the refs pregame at 12.5 psi, not 13.5. So anyone wishing to defend the Pats by saying they "could have been 13.5" is calling their own defendants liars.

 

[DFWJC]

We didn't need to see your poster from above your bed.
That's a just a bit over the top...definitely tmi.

 

[Nightman]

http://www.amazon.com/The-Physics-Football-Bone-Crunching-Awe-Inspiring/dp/0060826347

The book above features a "Foreword" by Bill Belichick. You know, the guy who claimed to know nothing about footballs and physics until last week.

Some subjects in the book:

Football, Bouncing
Football, Holding on to
Football, prolate spheroid shape
Football, Weight

Belichick wrote a lengthy foreword in this book back in 2004, touting the importance and use of physics in every aspect of the game.

Great find.......and people still refuse to believe anything bad about the guy

 

[khiladi]

http://www.amazon.com/The-Physics-Football-Bone-Crunching-Awe-Inspiring/dp/0060826347

The book above features a "Foreword" by Bill Belichick. You know, the guy who claimed to know nothing about footballs and physics until last week.

Some subjects in the book:

Football, Bouncing
Football, Holding on to
Football, prolate spheroid shape
Football, Weight

Belichick wrote a lengthy foreword in this book back in 2004, touting the importance and use of physics in every aspect of the game.

Lance Armstrong part 2....

 

[Nightman]

Yeah, I know they recorded if they passed or fail with a ball mark. I'm not confused on that.
I was saying that they did not write down the exact psi for each ball and were not required to do so. In other words, a passed ball that gets checked could be anywhere between roughly 12.5-13.5 psi. That's all they needed to know.

And yes, the facts according to the refs are that the balls 2 hours before the game were approved and by halftime, the Pats balls were below standard while the Colts' balls were not.
True.

But do you believe that both sets of footballs that sat in the refs room for 2 hours still reacted differently when brought outside. I would think 2 hours of sitting at room temperature would place both sets of footballs in the exact same temperature zone.

So the only way for the 'science' theory to work would be that the INDY balls started at 13.5, the NE balls started at 13.0 or below and the temperature change from the ref's room to field of 72-51 degrees caused a precise 1 psi drop. That would leave the NE balls outside the legal range and the INDY balls still inside.

I guess that would be possible, but I say improbable. I still don't think that going from 72-50 would cause that much of decrease in that short a period of time. Teams play in sub zero games and the balls aren't noticeably deflated after going from 72-0.

To me it has always been NE and Brady trying to get the balls exactly how he likes them and hoping the refs continue not to notice.

 

[EST_1986]

Only 1 of the balls were 2 PSI under inflated, the rest were just a few ticks off from the legal range.

 

[BoysFan4ever]

I'm still disappointed in Lance Armstrong but he's been a bit of a jerk about it so you reap what you sow.

BB is a very good coach..arguably the best today..so why cheat? It's not necessary.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

I'm still disappointed in Lance Armstrong but he's been a bit of a jerk about it so you reap what you sow.

BB is a very good coach..arguably the best today..so why cheat? It's not necessary.

Warren Sharp @SharpFootball · Jan 27
1. A smart coach understands the easiest way to win games is to reduce turnovers. Teams who win the turnover battle win ~ 80% of games.


Warren Sharp @SharpFootball · Jan 27
From 01-06, Brady had 4,006 plays (att+rush+sack) & 65 fumbles From 07-14, Brady had 5113 plays & 39 fumbles - 2 x worse @smartfootball

 

[Hoofbite]

Warren Sharp @SharpFootball · Jan 27
1. A smart coach understands the easiest way to win games is to reduce turnovers. Teams who win the turnover battle win ~ 80% of games.


Warren Sharp @SharpFootball · Jan 27
From 01-06, Brady had 4,006 plays (att+rush+sack) & 65 fumbles From 07-14, Brady had 5113 plays & 39 fumbles - 2 x worse @smartfootball

I guess that settles it. Case closed.

If a guy fumbles a lot as a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd year player he'll always fumble a lot unless he finds a way to cheat.

 

[Hoofbite]

Only 1 of the balls were 2 PSI under inflated, the rest were just a few ticks off from the legal range.

Just watched the Rappaport report on NFL.com.

Sounds like a few were 1 psi under as well. Didn't sound too sure on the amount of each, but did hear him say that only 1 was under my the 2 psi.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

I guess that settles it. Case closed.

If a guy fumbles a lot as a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd year player he'll always fumble a lot unless he finds a way to cheat.

widen your sample size maybe? can't use a small sample size.

 

[Hoofbite]

widen your sample size maybe? can't use a small sample size.

He fumbled 36 times in the regular season in his first 3 years. 23 fumbles in years 4-6.

I can't be positive but it sure seems like he started to improve prior to 2006.

I'm just saying that it's not so impossible to believe that a guy with a fumbling problem actually recognized it and made an effort to improve.

Romo fumbled 32 times in his first 39 games. In the 84 games he's played starting in 2009 he's fumbled 32 times as well. Hey, that's 2X better.

What can we possibly attribute this to that occurred around 2009? Oh, that's right. Dallas moved "indoors" with the new stadium at the start of 2009. Wow, indoor teams must have an advantage.

It's even possible that the rule change about breaking in balls helped Brady all by itself, no deflating necessary. That wouldn't make him unique. If you look at the charts you'll notice a rightward shift, which indicates that the entire league has fumbled less starting in 2007.

It just seems silly to point to his younger days and pretend like he wouldn't improve with experience. Does anyone actually think Andrew Luck will be a 10 fumble per year player for his entire career?

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

He fumbled 36 times in the regular season in his first 3 years. 23 fumbles in years 4-6.

I can't be positive but it sure seems like he started to improve prior to 2006.

I'm just saying that it's not so impossible to believe that a guy with a fumbling problem actually recognized it and made an effort to improve.

Romo fumbled 32 times in his first 39 games. In the 84 games he's played starting in 2009 he's fumbled 32 times as well. Hey, that's 2X better.

What can we possibly attribute this to that occurred around 2009? Oh, that's right. Dallas moved "indoors" with the new stadium at the start of 2009. Wow, indoor teams must have an advantage.

It's even possible that the rule change about breaking in balls helped Brady all by itself, no deflating necessary. That wouldn't make him unique. If you look at the charts you'll notice a rightward shift, which indicates that the entire league has fumbled less starting in 2007.

It just seems silly to point to his younger days and pretend like he wouldn't improve with experience. Does anyone actually think Andrew Luck will be a 10 fumble per year player for his entire career?

Hoofbite if you can refute/counter/rebuttal Warren Sharp have at it. He actually welcomes anyone to bring data that reflects the opposite of his data should it exist...

• To Point #1: Can you disprove that the Patriots changed in 2007, and prove that their 2000-06 fumble rate actually was very comparable to the 2007-14 fumble rate?
• To Point #2: Can you disprove that the Patriots were statistical outliers in the 2007-14 period, and prove that the rest of the NFL, particularly the outdoor teams, actually fumbled at the same rate as the Patriots?

www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/follow-up-to-discuss-differing-studies-regarding-the-new-england-patriots-fumble-rate-since-2000


"If the data that others uncover thru different means and statistics show that 1) the Patriots do change in 2007, and 2) they do move well ahead of the NFL average by some margin from 207-14, but not to the exact extent of the data that I used would indicate, that’s still confirming (not denying) a potential issue, and we have even more data (which is different data) which shows 1) they changed and 2) they are different from the rest of the NFL. So the first step is, find data that disproves my numbers which are graphed above."

 

[dogberry]

Thomas Healy's experiment is public and should be the baseline for examing the psi issue (at least until he gets some competition).

 

[Nightman]

Hoofbite if you can refute/counter/rebuttal Warren Sharp have at it. He actually welcomes anyone to bring data that reflects the opposite of his data should it exist...

• To Point #1: Can you disprove that the Patriots changed in 2007, and prove that their 2000-06 fumble rate actually was very comparable to the 2007-14 fumble rate?
• To Point #2: Can you disprove that the Patriots were statistical outliers in the 2007-14 period, and prove that the rest of the NFL, particularly the outdoor teams, actually fumbled at the same rate as the Patriots?

www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/follow-up-to-discuss-differing-studies-regarding-the-new-england-patriots-fumble-rate-since-2000


"If the data that others uncover thru different means and statistics show that 1) the Patriots do change in 2007, and 2) they do move well ahead of the NFL average by some margin from 207-14, but not to the exact extent of the data that I used would indicate, that’s still confirming (not denying) a potential issue, and we have even more data (which is different data) which shows 1) they changed and 2) they are different from the rest of the NFL. So the first step is, find data that disproves my numbers which are graphed above."

People are arguing with him about conclusions he didn't make. All he said is something changed in 2006 and the Patriot numbers are outliers.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

People are arguing with him about conclusions he didn't make. All he said is something changed in 2006 and the Patriot numbers are outliers.

exactly. he is not making a conclusion on what changed at all. his data shows something happened to change the numbers but not exactly what happened to change the numbers. i.e. "these numbers are crazy!"

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

The cover up is moving full steam ahead!

 

[Hoofbite]

People are arguing with him about conclusions he didn't make. All he said is something changed in 2006 and the Patriot numbers are outliers.

Except that's not all he has said. In the podcast posted earlier in the thread he says there's a correlation between the deflated balls and their ability to hold onto the football, and he thinks that the Patriots have been deflating balls since 2007.

He stops short of saying that it is the only reason, but that's something nobody could actually commit to.