Lets Ponder the Patriots Deflationgate Issue

[WPBCowboysFan]

I know this wasn't for me, but there is something that should be clarified.

They did not say the Colts balls did not deflate. People keep saying that and that's not what they said.

They said the Colts balls were still within the legal guidelines.

it would be impossible to know if they deflated or not without keeping record of the exact psi of each ball before the game and at halftime. They did not do that and have never done that.
All they care is that the balls are (roughly) within the 12.5 - 13.5 legal range. They measure that with a hand held air gauge and not a digital one.

I'm not saying that explains anything one way or the other.
I'm just highlighting something that keeps getting misstated in this thread.

Its just a way of referring to the scenario.

Actually we do know that the Colts balls did not deflate below the acceptable psi.

And we do know that all 12 of the Patriots balls were deflated below the acceptable range but 11 of them were at least 2 lbs below the acceptable range.

So we can split hairs over how we describe the balls but the scenario remains the same.

 

[Miller]

Troy talked about it as well and he said nothing happens to the footballs w/o the QB's ok.

This isnt a "if the glove doesnt fit you must acquit" courtroom scenario, its pretty simple really. The simple fact is the Pats balls were deflated and the Colts balls were not. Officials have to certify/verify that the psi is correct before games. Why would an official not do his job? Its what he's paid to do. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt may be required to convict in a court of law, but we're talking about footballs in a sports league. And the balls for one team were deflated. Somebody had to let the air out. There is no getting around that. There are only several explanations. And all the explanations point one big finger right at the Patriots organization. So the only mystery yet to be determined is how this will be "explained" to the general public.

I really dont know how anybody other than a blind Pats homer in denial could see it any other way.

Please stop with this nonsense. It makes you look like you have no argument and like the fools who say "you must have never played football."

Also, there are plenty of explanations outside of what you are saying but you are basically hating as hard as you think people are being homers. A some point in your life you have to be what people call "objective" and look at all angles. It's beyond comical that the Cowboys board is letting refs off the hook by saying "why would they lie and not do their job?" I don't know, maybe because they are incompetent, or lazy, or don't get the rules right. Haven't we seen more incompetence this post season than any other? We have also heard ball boys and others say that the refs don't always measure the balls with the gun and just assume they are right. Dan Marino was just on TV saying that it is overblown and that he doesn't think Brady would cheat and that this would show up a lot more often if it was a pattern.

Also, you are all assuming the Colts balls were all 13.5 or inflated the SAME all game. No one ever said that. They only stayed within their range of acceptability. So if theirs were lower but acceptable at halftime and the Patriots started lower and then went below, it would be that both balls went down.

I'll repeat part of the post I put up yesterday....It's strange to hear people say "well who cares if they would have won anyways, even though they dominated more with inflated balls, its still cheating" People should care because their proof is that the Pats gained an unfair advantage and that Brady HAD to have known a difference while in the game. Well wouldn't he also know the difference in inflated balls AFTER half? Yet it made no difference and there is zero evidence he reacted or knew a thing for that big of a 1st and 2nd half difference. All we have is dumb speculation...."well if they had Spygate and then this they cheat all the time." Wouldn't it be just as logical to say "the refs have sucked all post season they probably improperly measured the balls and its on them." If once a cheater, always a cheater" matters to some, why not "once mixed crews suck, then they always sucks?" I also find it comical that people don't think league wide over the years that every team out there would be trying to bust NE but this is the only thing that has come up in decade. To me the whole thing was a witch hunt. The league tried to get out ahead by leaking info and it has actually come back to bite them. NE shouldn't be embarrassed. The NFL should be because they are going to end up leaning on the Goodell rule of "ignorance doesn't matter" and they will fine NE. There is nothing here. Especially if the refs had the balls, a ball boy on video goes pee and then takes both teams out, and then they are on the field of play where there are cameras everywhere. The conclusion would be that someone was using a needle on the sideline to do it.....which then begs the question....how did they uniformly all go down he same level? Near impossible without getting caught on camera. To me it then goes back to the 2 hours in the refs possession. If they come out with a smoking gun, I'm on your side. But until there is something more and the something more points to willful disregard for the rules, then I find this whole thing overblown..no pun...and ridiculous.

This isn't being a Pats homer. I think they have a great franchise but I have allegiance to only one team, the Cowboys. My pet peeve on message boards is objectivity. It's not always black and white. It allows me to respect other posters and at the same time debate. People have turned this into a beating that goes something like this.."they are cheaters because they cheated before"; they are cheaters because balls being deflated in ONE game means it was on purpose" and "if its found they didn't cheat, its a coverup." Yet why would the league cover up for an owner that just yelled them down and an organization that got busted and punished before? People need to start using their heads and let the process work.

 

[Miller]

Its just a way of referring to the scenario.

Actually we do know that the Colts balls did not deflate below the acceptable psi.

And we do know that all 12 of the Patriots balls were deflated below the acceptable range but 11 of them were at least 2 lbs below the acceptable range.

So we can split hairs over how we describe the balls but the scenario remains the same.

Wrong. That was the initial leak. People are now saying that many balls were only 1 psi low.

 

[MrPeanutbutter]

My interpretation of the water - which I gladly admit may be mistaken - is not that there was any sort of internal condensation but that water can stretch out the leather by a small amount. So if there is a fixed amount of air in a sealed container, and that container expands, the amount of PSI decreases....


Have no idea if that's legit or not...

I think this is soundish science, but I don't know that this accounts for that big of a difference.

Unrelated, but there is a fallacy that claims two things
1) The Patriots fumble less than the field
2) The Patriots fumble less because of the football

Here's a great article that took down both of those arguments

 

[Rogah]

I think this is soundish science, but I don't know that this accounts for that big of a difference.

Ya I don't buy the "water expands the leather" theory.... though I will say that cold water draws heat away from an object faster than cold air so the temperature of the ball would decrease faster in the rain than no rain...

Unrelated, but there is a fallacy that claims two things
1) The Patriots fumble less than the field
2) The Patriots fumble less because of the football

Here's a great article that took down both of those arguments

Link not working, but I would be interested in reading that article.

 

[Miller]

Ya I don't buy the "water expands the leather" theory.... though I will say that cold water draws heat away from an object faster than cold air so the temperature of the ball would decrease faster in the rain than no rain...
Link not working, but I would be interested in reading that article.

I don't know if this is what they posted but I posted this yesterday that disproves it.

http://drewfustin.com/2015/01/27/patriots-fumble-comments/

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Please stop with this nonsense. It makes you look like you have no argument and like the fools who say "you must have never played football."

Also, there are plenty of explanations outside of what you are saying but you are basically hating as hard as you think people are being homers. A some point in your life you have to be what people call "objective" and look at all angles. It's beyond comical that the Cowboys board is letting refs off the hook by saying "why would they lie and not do their job?" I don't know, maybe because they are incompetent, or lazy, or don't get the rules right. Haven't we seen more incompetence this post season than any other? We have also heard ball boys and others say that the refs don't always measure the balls with the gun and just assume they are right. Dan Marino was just on TV saying that it is overblown and that he doesn't think Brady would cheat and that this would show up a lot more often if it was a pattern.

Also, you are all assuming the Colts balls were all 13.5 or inflated the SAME all game. No one ever said that. They only stayed within their range of acceptability. So if theirs were lower but acceptable at halftime and the Patriots started lower and then went below, it would be that both balls went down.

I'll repeat part of the post I put up yesterday....It's strange to hear people say "well who cares if they would have won anyways, even though they dominated more with inflated balls, its still cheating" People should care because their proof is that the Pats gained an unfair advantage and that Brady HAD to have known a difference while in the game. Well wouldn't he also know the difference in inflated balls AFTER half? Yet it made no difference and there is zero evidence he reacted or knew a thing for that big of a 1st and 2nd half difference. All we have is dumb speculation...."well if they had Spygate and then this they cheat all the time." Wouldn't it be just as logical to say "the refs have sucked all post season they probably improperly measured the balls and its on them." If once a cheater, always a cheater" matters to some, why not "once mixed crews suck, then they always sucks?" I also find it comical that people don't think league wide over the years that every team out there would be trying to bust NE but this is the only thing that has come up in decade. To me the whole thing was a witch hunt. The league tried to get out ahead by leaking info and it has actually come back to bite them. NE shouldn't be embarrassed. The NFL should be because they are going to end up leaning on the Goodell rule of "ignorance doesn't matter" and they will fine NE. There is nothing here. Especially if the refs had the balls, a ball boy on video goes pee and then takes both teams out, and then they are on the field of play where there are cameras everywhere. The conclusion would be that someone was using a needle on the sideline to do it.....which then begs the question....how did they uniformly all go down he same level? Near impossible without getting caught on camera. To me it then goes back to the 2 hours in the refs possession. If they come out with a smoking gun, I'm on your side. But until there is something more and the something more points to willful disregard for the rules, then I find this whole thing overblown..no pun...and ridiculous.

This isn't being a Pats homer. I think they have a great franchise but I have allegiance to only one team, the Cowboys. My pet peeve on message boards is objectivity. It's not always black and white. It allows me to respect other posters and at the same time debate. People have turned this into a beating that goes something like this.."they are cheaters because they cheated before"; they are cheaters because balls being deflated in ONE game means it was on purpose" and "if its found they didn't cheat, its a coverup." Yet why would the league cover up for an owner that just yelled them down and an organization that got busted and punished before? People need to start using their heads and let the process work.

Ok, so if we go along with your nonsense and the officials didnt really check the balls then that means the Colts ahead of the check had their balls inflated to the acceptable range but the Patriots did not, knowing full well what the balls should be inflated to. Either way, they didnt have their balls inflated in accordance with the rules.

You spoke of objectivity so deal with it even tho it doesnt fit your agenda, whatever your agenda is.

 

[MrPeanutbutter]

I think this is soundish science, but I don't know that this accounts for that big of a difference.

Unrelated, but there is a fallacy that claims two things
1) The Patriots fumble less than the field
2) The Patriots fumble less because of the football

Here's a great article that took down both of those arguments

Here is the actual link

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Wrong. That was the initial leak. People are now saying that many balls were only 1 psi low.

Oh, so now we go with the "changed story" rather than what was reported closest to the incident?

Gotcha!

 

[Rogah]

Oh, so now we go with the "changed story" rather than what was reported closest to the incident?

Gotcha!

Actually, when it comes to these types of situations, the deepr people dig, the more accurate the reports generally become.

Just admit it: you're believing what you want to believe because it fits your narrative. You want the Patriots to be guilty so you believe the 2 PSI report. And then you want to act like it is the equivalent of a homicide when it's really the equivalent of a speeding ticket.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Actually, when it comes to these types of situations, the deepr people dig, the more accurate the reports generally become.

Just admit it: you're believing what you want to believe because it fits your narrative. You want the Patriots to be guilty so you believe the 2 PSI report. And then you want to act like it is the equivalent of a homicide when it's really the equivalent of a speeding ticket.

This post is a major fail on both parts.

Actually, the psi numbers reported closest to the time they were checked would tend to be the most accurate. There is no legitimate reason to think those numbers changed.

Why dont you just admit you are a Patriots homer masquerading as a Cowboys fan on a Cowboys fan forum and are clearly the one picking and choosing what fits your agenda and how you desire things to be. Unlike you, I have no narrative or agenda other than to recognize what actually happened. Im not looking for "reasons" to try and show that cheaters didnt cheat even tho the evidence clearly shows there is sufficient reason to believe they cheated, no matter how much crap is thrown out there and how many smokescreens and "I know nothing"s are thrown out by the Pats

 

[Miller]

Ok, so if we go along with your nonsense and the officials didnt really check the balls then that means the Colts ahead of the check had their balls inflated to the acceptable range but the Patriots did not, knowing full well what the balls should be inflated to. Either way, they didnt have their balls inflated in accordance with the rules.

You spoke of objectivity so deal with it even tho it doesnt fit your agenda, whatever your agenda is.

Think about what you just said. Do you really think the Patriots would purposefully submit balls THAT far below regulation to refs? IF the refs screwed up it was probably with balls that the Pats submitted right at the lower end or what they thought was the lower end. I doubt getting busted for fun was on their agenda. I also never said they won't be found to have cheated. I just like to see both sides without screaming people down for how dumb or homerish they are.

 

[Miller]

Oh, so now we go with the "changed story" rather than what was reported closest to the incident?

Gotcha!

No, again, its called waiting to see what the reality is vs. telling people off and being one sided. You are making absolute statements like they are true.

 

[Rogah]

This post is a major fail on both parts.

Actually, the psi numbers reported closest to the time they were checked would tend to be the most accurate.

If it was an official source, you'd have a point. But what we have are unofficial sources and leaked information. In general, as stories progress, leaks tend to get more accurate - not less accurate - because a leak that comes later on is often correcting an earlier, incorrect leak.

I am not saying that is what happened here, I am just giving the general rule. Your attitude that the first leak must be the correct one is based on nothing more than your agenda to believe anything and everything that fits your pre-judged narrative.

There is no legitimate reason to think those numbers changed.

Translation, you're just going to believe whatever fits the narrative yo uhave pre-judged to be true.

Why dont you just admit you are a Patriots homer masquerading as a Cowboys fan on a Cowboys fan forum and are clearly the one picking and choosing what fits your agenda and how you desire things to be.

This point was addressed in another thread where I slammed the statement back in the accuser's face by showing a picture of my Cowboys season ticket holder playoff sheet and a couple souvenir cups from the past few years at the stadium.

He claimed he was just joking. I am sure once you see those pictures, you'll say you were just joking too.

 

[khiladi]

I don't know if this is what they posted but I posted this yesterday that disproves it.

http://drewfustin.com/2015/01/27/patriots-fumble-comments/

I've already addressed this.

His three premises are:

1. Sharp doesn't take into account dome teams. He does, in a different article. I keep wondering where people argue this, when Sharp speaks about it specifically

2. That Sharp uses five year cycles, and is trying to argue against it based on the anomaly that is 2013. What Drew is trying to argue is that one could take 2014 and 2013 with this anomaly and Patriots would be among the middle. He knows, as Sharp pointed out, that this number is obscured by SIX fumbles against Denver in frigid conditions. So he tries to argue that taking this into account, a relative adjustment which is done in statistics all the time, is random. It's not, because the conditions were EXTREMELY frigid and SIX fumbles in a game is VERY RARE for MULTIPLE YEARS let alone a single year. You won't find teams fumbling six times in a game in multiple years let alone one year. A BAD game in the NFL in regards to fumbling is 3 fumbles in a game or even two, and this doubled the output in ONE game. It's a statistical anomaly that has to be accounted for.

3. While admitting that the Patriots fumbles lost does dramatically improve after 2007, he tries to argue it was because of a better Brady. But that has nothing to do with the issue, because a fumble happens when the ball is in possession. Whether you throw a ball and it's caught or run the ball, he have to possess it. Brady protecting the ball better by throwing it at receiver's feet or a spear offense with short passes has nothing to do with the issue of the ball being secure in a WR or RBs hands.

 

[JoeKing]

Troy talked about it as well and he said nothing happens to the footballs w/o the QB's ok.

This isnt a "if the glove doesnt fit you must acquit" courtroom scenario, its pretty simple really. The simple fact is the Pats balls were deflated and the Colts balls were not. Officials have to certify/verify that the psi is correct before games. Why would an official not do his job? Its what he's paid to do. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt may be required to convict in a court of law, but we're talking about footballs in a sports league. And the balls for one team were deflated. Somebody had to let the air out. There is no getting around that. There are only several explanations. And all the explanations point one big finger right at the Patriots organization. So the only mystery yet to be determined is how this will be "explained" to the general public.

I really dont know how anybody other than a blind Pats homer in denial could see it any other way.

You are right, it doesn't look good for the Pats. When we weigh the evidence and compare that to the denial of knowledge of ball tampering by Brady, they don't add up. The only plausible explanation is that someone is lying. I'm still conflicted with who that is. It just seems too convenient to blame Brady.

Brady has stated in public he likes his balls at 12.5 psi, which is a legal ball. When the balls are certified by the officials at 13 psi and then turned over to each team, would it be illegal for the Pats balls to then be deflated 0.5 psi to 12.5 psi, the way Brady likes them? I say no, because that is within the allowable tolerance. In this case there is no intent to cheat.

Now let's say the deflation to the balls to 12.5 psi was accidentally improperly done, not to Brady's wishes but just a fraction of a psi lower. The balls would be illegal at this point but unintentionally. Intent to cheat is hard to prove my friend.

I'm no blind Pats homer, I just don't see how intent to cheat can be proven in this case.

 

[khiladi]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/23/us/nfl-patriots-deflategate/

"While the evidence thus far supports the conclusion that footballs that were under-inflated were used by the Patriots in the first half, the footballs were properly inflated for the second half and confirmed at the conclusion of the game to have remained properly inflated," the NFL's statement said.

The statement said the NFL wants to know "specifically whether any noncompliance was the result of deliberate action. We have not made any judgments on these points and will not do so until we have concluded our investigation and considered all of the relevant evidence."

The balls were deflated and the NFL admitted it officially. By deflated they obviously mean below legal limits. They also say it was the balls the Patriots used, not the Colts.

 

[Miller]

I've already addressed this.

His three premises are:

1. Sharp doesn't take into account dome teams. He does, in a different article. I keep wondering where people argue this, when Sharp speaks about it specifically

2. That Sharp uses five year cycles, and is trying to argue against it based on the anomaly that is 2013. What Drew is trying to argue is that one could take 2014 and 2013 with this anomaly and Patriots would be among the middle. He knows, as Sharp pointed out, that this number is obscured by SIX fumbles against Denver in frigid conditions. So he tries to argue that taking this into account, a relative adjustment which is done in statistics all the time, is random. It's not, because the conditions were EXTREMELY frigid and SIX fumbles in a game is VERY RARE for MULTIPLE YEARS let alone a single year. You won't find teams fumbling six times in a game in multiple years let alone one year. A BAD game in the NFL in regards to fumbling is 3 fumbles in a game or even two, and this doubled the output in ONE game.

3. While admitting that the Patriots fumbles lost does dramatically improve after 2007, he tries to argue it was because of a better Brady. But that has nothing to do with the issue, because a fumble happens when the ball is in possession. Whether you throw a ball and it's caught or run the ball, he have to possess it. Brady protecting the ball better by throwing it at receiver's feet or a spear offense with short passes has nothing to do with the issue of the ball being secure in a WR or RBs hands.

Completely disagree on #3. In order to have possession, you have to GAIN possession. In many cases Brady getting rid of the ball quicker or in places where only the WR can catch it but doesn't run after the catch makes a difference. Many bubble screens are quick hitters and then the guy gets to the sideline. Also, there is stat that Brady has fumbled more than other QBs this year alone. So where does that come from?

Also, the article opens up the discussion to looking at it year by year. Which shows the Patriots were horrible at last year. So did they just forget to deflate last year?

Also, is there a study that shows the difference in fumbling between 12.5 psi and say 13.5 or 13.5 vs dflated 11.5? Because that's the only way to know. The Pats admit they like balls at the low end. Great. So maybe 12.5 is better than 13.5 so lets look at that.

Again, its funny that ALL of this is now news off of 1 game. In order for the Pats to be cheating for 7 years now..thus dropping fumbles... is for them to be underinflating balls for 7 years without being caught by a ref measuring or a camera. So every game, including playoffs, they have done this and NEVER has a ball been tested below the limit. Odd, wouldn't you say. Heck maybe the Helmet catch that beat them in the SB was because the Giants used softer balls that made it easier to squeeze to a helmet...see how this works?

 

[khiladi]

Completely disagree on #3. In order to have possession, you have to GAIN possession. In many cases Brady getting rid of the ball quicker or in places where only the WR can catch it but doesn't run after the catch makes a difference. Many bubble screens are quick hitters and then the guy gets to the sideline. Also, there is stat that Brady has fumbled more than other QBs this year alone. So where does that come from?

Also, the article opens up the discussion to looking at it year by year. Which shows the Patriots were horrible at last year. So did they just forget to deflate last year?

Also, is there a study that shows the difference in fumbling between 12.5 psi and say 13.5 or 13.5 vs dflated 11.5? Because that's the only way to know. The Pats admit they like balls at the low end. Great. So maybe 12.5 is better than 13.5 so lets look at that.

Again, its funny that ALL of this is now news off of 1 game. In order for the Pats to be cheating for 7 years now..thus dropping fumbles... is for them to be underinflating balls for 7 years without being caught by a ref measuring or a camera. So every game, including playoffs, they have done this and NEVER has a ball been tested below the limit. Odd, wouldn't you say. Heck maybe the Helmet catch that beat them in the SB was because the Giants used softer balls that made it easier to squeeze to a helmet...see how this works?

It's obvious you are not paying attention.

1. If you don't gain possession, it's not a fumble. Again, it's irrelevant, because we are talking about FUMBLES, meaning the player had possession.
2. Again, LAST YEAR, that 'horrible' is caused by the ANOMALY of the Denver game. That is 6 FUMBLES in one game. As I said, Drew tries to argue that taking this statistical anomaly out is random, but it's not. See above once again.
3. It's entirely possible the Patriots could pull off shenanigans for multiple years. They were pulling off Spygate for 7 years. Brady is 14-3 at home in the play-offs and 3-3 in road games.
4. Why do people nonsensically just keep talking about Brady as if ball protection is just exclusive to him? Further, nobody is arguing deflated footballs is an ABSOLUTE protection against fumbling. People can still fumble with a deflated ball.
5. Even Brady had 10 fumbles last year, but it was recovered 5 times. Less Bounce...

Most of these responses are rooted in this idiocy.

 

[Rogah]

Again, its funny that ALL of this is now news off of 1 game. In order for the Pats to be cheating for 7 years now..thus dropping fumbles... is for them to be underinflating balls for 7 years without being caught by a ref measuring or a camera. So every game, including playoffs, they have done this and NEVER has a ball been tested below the limit. Odd, wouldn't you say. Heck maybe the Helmet catch that beat them in the SB was because the Giants used softer balls that made it easier to squeeze to a helmet...see how this works?

Better be careful; it's dangerous to bring common sense into a discussion with haters.

I commented on the fumbles chart and pointed out some of the many flaws but bottom line is this: I can understand how a minor tweak to PSI can help a QB improve his grip. Grip is a very delicate thing. I don't believe that a minor change to PSI can help a RB or WR hold onto the thing when a 273 pound linebacker is doing everything he can to rip the ball from his arms.

eh, haters gonna hate. What can ya say?