NFL 2014 [Archive] - Page 3 - RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion

RedsBaron

01-19-2015, 07:50 AM

That was one colossal second half collapse by GB. Wow! The fake FG really ignited Seattle.

But McCarthy's "play it safe" ultra-conservative play calling in the second half really hurt his team IMO.
Mike McCarthy and his staff get high grades for a good game plan going into the game, especially a good defensive scheme. However the Packers special teams get an "F". Even worse, McCarthy and his staff got away from their defensive game plan in the second half and played not-to-lose on offense. The Packers players certainly made a bunch of mistakes in the game but this loss should primarily be laid to the feet of McCarthy and the assistant coaches. They choked and blew the game.

Stray

01-19-2015, 10:35 AM

lol Deflate Gate

Never change, Patriots.

Stray

01-19-2015, 10:44 AM

Mike McCarthy and his staff get high grades for a good game plan going into the game, especially a good defensive scheme. However the Packers special teams get an "F". Even worse, McCarthy and his staff got away from their defensive game plan in the second half and played not-to-lose on offense. The Packers players certainly made a bunch of mistakes in the game but this loss should primarily be laid to the feet of McCarthy and the assistant coaches. They choked and blew the game.

I don't know if I'd go that far. In the first half I thought they should have went for it on the 1 yard line, but that's also with the benefit of hindsight and knowing the Packers would have multiple chances in the red zone that half. At the time, he wanted the points and that's not a terrible decision against a great defense.

Second half they played decent, but the weather was terrible and Rodgers wasn't that sharp. The conservative offense had as much to do with that as anything, and then the Seahawks just made a lot of great plays. The onside wasn't a coaching breakdown so much as it was a player breakdown, that was Jordy Nelson's ball but the other guy who was supposed to block went after it for some reason. Defensively they were aggressive the entire game and in the end it's why they lost. Wilson was missing throws he could have made in the 1st half, but late in the game he beat them over the top with several passes including the game winner. The only super conservative defense I remember was on a 3rd and 20 or something, and playing coverage isn't a bad call there...you just can't give up a 30 yard completion obviously.

When the other team makes the plays Seattle made to beat you it says a lot more about the Seahawks. The Packers problem was not putting the game out of reach in the first half.

RedsBaron

01-19-2015, 01:52 PM

I don't know if I'd go that far. In the first half I thought they should have went for it on the 1 yard line, but that's also with the benefit of hindsight and knowing the Packers would have multiple chances in the red zone that half. At the time, he wanted the points and that's not a terrible decision against a great defense.

Second half they played decent, but the weather was terrible and Rodgers wasn't that sharp. The conservative offense had as much to do with that as anything, and then the Seahawks just made a lot of great plays. The onside wasn't a coaching breakdown so much as it was a player breakdown, that was Jordy Nelson's ball but the other guy who was supposed to block went after it for some reason. Defensively they were aggressive the entire game and in the end it's why they lost. Wilson was missing throws he could have made in the 1st half, but late in the game he beat them over the top with several passes including the game winner. The only super conservative defense I remember was on a 3rd and 20 or something, and playing coverage isn't a bad call there...you just can't give up a 30 yard completion obviously.

When the other team makes the plays Seattle made to beat you it says a lot more about the Seahawks. The Packers problem was not putting the game out of reach in the first half.

You make some good points. I am just frustrated as a fan. I still think McCarthy played too conservatively in the second half.

Kingspoint

01-19-2015, 09:10 PM

From "The Oregonian":

http://imgick.oregonlive.com/home/olive-media/width620/img/nfl_impact/photo/almost-had-it-bostick-669960b214666310.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7q-jwvCYAEoFdp.jpg:large

Sea Ray

01-20-2015, 10:24 AM

I don't know if I'd go that far. In the first half I thought they should have went for it on the 1 yard line, but that's also with the benefit of hindsight and knowing the Packers would have multiple chances in the red zone that half. At the time, he wanted the points and that's not a terrible decision against a great defense.

Second half they played decent, but the weather was terrible and Rodgers wasn't that sharp. The conservative offense had as much to do with that as anything, and then the Seahawks just made a lot of great plays. The onside wasn't a coaching breakdown so much as it was a player breakdown, that was Jordy Nelson's ball but the other guy who was supposed to block went after it for some reason. Defensively they were aggressive the entire game and in the end it's why they lost. Wilson was missing throws he could have made in the 1st half, but late in the game he beat them over the top with several passes including the game winner. The only super conservative defense I remember was on a 3rd and 20 or something, and playing coverage isn't a bad call there...you just can't give up a 30 yard completion obviously.

When the other team makes the plays Seattle made to beat you it says a lot more about the Seahawks. The Packers problem was not putting the game out of reach in the first half.

GB did everything they possibly could to lose the game in the last 5 mins. Seattle's winning TD was an across the body floater from Wilson--usually a no no--but GB let him get away with it. In the 2nd qtr they had Seattle backed up after a long sack and then they proceeded to only rush 3 guys giving Wilson all day to throw. Seattle had 6 blocking 3. That's just plain stupid. GB also cannot allow a fake FG like that to result in a long TD. That cannot happen. GB did everything they could to lose

Assembly Hall

01-20-2015, 11:11 AM

blumj

01-20-2015, 12:00 PM

lol Deflate Gate

Never change, Patriots.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/nfl-investigating-whether-patriots-played-game-wit,37805/

Stray

01-20-2015, 08:22 PM

GB did everything they possibly could to lose the game in the last 5 mins. Seattle's winning TD was an across the body floater from Wilson--usually a no no--but GB let him get away with it. In the 2nd qtr they had Seattle backed up after a long sack and then they proceeded to only rush 3 guys giving Wilson all day to throw. Seattle had 6 blocking 3. That's just plain stupid. GB also cannot allow a fake FG like that to result in a long TD. That cannot happen. GB did everything they could to lose

They actually only rushed two and had a spy, but it was 3rd and a mile so playing coverage isn't a bad call. If you have 8 players in coverage and they give up a wide open 30 yard completion, that's a player problem.

I guess instead of looking at it like Green Bay threw the game away my biggest takeaway was how resilient Seattle were and how they did everything they needed to do to win the game late. The plays Green Bay called were plenty good enough to win the game, even the execution was good enough to win that game 9 times outta 10 imo. That was a once in a who knows what kinda loss. Everything that had to happen happened both ways. If that backup TE blocks like he's supposed to the onside falls into Jordy Nelson's arms and Green Bay goes to the Superbowl. If Dix doesn't allow a 2 pt conversion hail mary that he'd almost never allow Green Bay is going to the Superbowl. If the ref had decided the personal foul for taking out the guy who sacked Wilson was a deadball penalty (and I think it was), then Seattle never gets the chance to kick a fg or run a fake. Or the GB defender going down after the last int when he had plenty of room to run back into FG range....

I just can't look at how that game played out and blame it on the Packers coaching staff. There's a ton of different individual plays you can pick out and find a GB player who coulda played it better and it would have led to the Superbowl.

Slyder

01-21-2015, 12:38 AM

Once a Belli-cheat... Always a Belli-cheat. I wish the NFL had some balls.

Stray

01-21-2015, 12:52 AM

If all the NFL is gonna do is fine them and take away a draft pick or two the Patriots won't stop. It got em to the Superbowl so what's the NFL willing to do to make it not worth it for them?

Dom Heffner

01-21-2015, 12:52 AM

11 of 12 deflated.

Tom Servo

01-21-2015, 01:48 AM

http://deadspin.com/aaron-rodgers-likes-to-tamper-with-footballs-too-1680676328

GAC

01-21-2015, 04:50 AM

Once a Belli-cheat... Always a Belli-cheat. I wish the NFL had some balls.

They do - they're just under-inflated!

The question is - how did the balls get under-inflated?

http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/12202450/nfl-says-new-england-patriots-had-inflated-footballs-afc-championship-game

The game balls provided to each team for preparation were required to be inspected and approved by referee Walt Anderson two hours and 15 minutes before kickoff before they were returned to a ball attendant before the game......

Under NFL rules, each team provides balls each game for use when its offense is on the field. The balls are inspected before the game by the officiating crew, then handled during the game by personnel provided by the home team.

Red Raindog

01-21-2015, 08:45 AM

11 of 12 deflated.

I now wonder how long this has been going on --- the Pats players seem to be saying they did not notice anything different with the balls -- could be a reason for that.....

If the Colts' balls were not under inflated -- I have to believe Bellichik will be suspended -- even that is not enough in my opinion

Assembly Hall

01-21-2015, 09:05 AM

Well, I hate the Seahawks, but I will be rooting for them to give the Pats a beat down.

Todd Gack

01-21-2015, 09:23 AM

Yawwwn. Big whoop. They under-inflated balls in a 40 point blowout. More teams should try to be doing these kinds of things with the arbitrary rules the NFL referees apply to these teams in the first place. Bravo to the Pats for bending the rules.

cumberlandreds

01-21-2015, 09:37 AM

11 of 12 deflated.

They do have medications for that now. :)

I really doubt it made one difference in this game. NE dominated and would have done the same if their balls were inflated properly.

Tom Servo

01-21-2015, 01:06 PM

Matt Leinart
‏@MattLeinartQB
Every team tampers with the footballs. Ask any Qb In the league, this is ridiculous!!

George Anderson

01-21-2015, 01:42 PM

traderumor

01-21-2015, 01:50 PM

Yea so lets just break the rules and cheat. Integrity and character mean nothing.There is obviously a reason for the rule, everyone knows it, and they apparently did what the rules said they are not allowed to do. Todd Gack and Matt Leinart, what am I missing here? Matt Leinart putting that USC education to good use with "everyone else is doing it, so what's the big deal?" Obviously he did not belong to the debate team.

Tom Servo

01-21-2015, 01:54 PM

Yea so lets just break the rules and cheat. Integrity and character mean nothing.
The integrity and character of the NFL, it's players, and it's officials was so strong before the Patriots went and ruined everything. :(

Sea Ray

01-21-2015, 01:56 PM

I now wonder how long this has been going on --- the Pats players seem to be saying they did not notice anything different with the balls -- could be a reason for that.....

If the Colts' balls were not under inflated -- I have to believe Bellichik will be suspended -- even that is not enough in my opinion

Before doing that you'd have to explain to me how Belicheck controlled which balls were used when Indy was on offense

Slyder

01-21-2015, 01:58 PM

Before doing that you'd have to explain to me how Belicheck controlled which balls were used when Indy was on offense

It was the balls controlled by New England, used by New England's offense that were deflated.

Sea Ray

01-21-2015, 02:00 PM

George Anderson

01-21-2015, 02:03 PM

The integrity and character of the NFL, it's players, and it's officials was so strong before the Patriots went and ruined everything. :(

Yep, so lets just throw the rule book out the window or at the very least ignore it since we know the NFL has had bad things happen before.

Slyder

01-21-2015, 02:06 PM

ESPN is having a "ball" with this but I'm still not impressed. I want to know how it happened and how it benefited one team and not the other. Who deflated the balls and did someone tell him to do so? How did the Patriots have access to them after being inspected by the referee?

- - - Updated - - -

Then why were 11 of 12 found to be under inflated?

Better grip to throw it for Brady.

Both teams get to rub up and inflate a set of balls, the officials inspect the balls ~2 hours before the game, then the balls go to personnel supplied by the home team. After that point anything could go.

Those 12 balls are used by the New England offense ONLY. Indy had a completely different set of balls.

Sea Ray

01-21-2015, 02:13 PM

Better grip to throw it for Brady.

Both teams get to rub up and inflate a set of balls, the officials inspect the balls ~2 hours before the game, then the balls go to personnel supplied by the home team. After that point anything could go.

Those 12 balls are used by the New England offense ONLY. Indy had a completely different set of balls.

Do we know that its inflation was checked two hours before?

It's crazy that the balls go to team personnel after being inspected. How many umpires would let Gaylord Perry to have access to the balls he's pitching with 2 hrs before the game? Thanks for the info...if this is the case then it's the NFL who brought this on and they need to change how they do things

Tom Servo

01-21-2015, 02:14 PM

Yep, so lets just throw the rule book out the window or at the very least ignore it since we know the NFL has had bad things happen before.
IF it is proven that they deflated the balls after they had been inspected, which means they broke a rule, they should be punished. But all the pearl clutching and "won't somebody think of the children" talk over air in a football is silly and almost certainly wouldn't even be going on if it didn't fit the 'Patriots are cheaters' narrative.

puca

01-21-2015, 03:24 PM

Brady went on record in 2011 that he preferred under-inflated balls. So there is that. He has smallish hands for an NFL quarterback and it apparently gives him better grip. I also imagine it makes it easier for receivers to catch on a colder day.

puca

01-21-2015, 03:30 PM

Do we know that its inflation was checked two hours before?

It's crazy that the balls go to team personnel after being inspected. How many umpires would let Gaylord Perry to have access to the balls he's pitching with 2 hrs before the game? Thanks for the info...if this is the case then it's the NFL who brought this on and they need to change how they do things

I agree this is crazy, and I have no doubt that will change in response to this incident. However it might be possible to achieve the same thing by inflating with hot air and/or keeping the balls in a hot-house prior to inspection. The balls will become less inflated when the air inside the balls cool. Who knows, this might be exactly what they did and probably wouldn't even be 'against' the rules as they are currently written.

traderumor

01-21-2015, 04:05 PM

IF it is proven that they deflated the balls after they had been inspected, which means they broke a rule, they should be punished. But all the pearl clutching and "won't somebody think of the children" talk over air in a football is silly and almost certainly wouldn't even be going on if it didn't fit the 'Patriots are cheaters' narrative.But the Patriots are cheaters. Its a narrative because they keep on getting caught doing funny business. I'm starting to think Bellicheck has some kind of personality disorder that is satisfied by trying to not only win the football game, but also "win" at breaking rules just to show that he can.

George Anderson

01-21-2015, 04:18 PM

But the Patriots are cheaters. Its a narrative because they keep on getting caught doing funny business. I'm starting to think Bellicheck has some kind of personality disorder that is satisfied by trying to not only win the football game, but also "win" at breaking rules just to show that he can.

Thats the thing is the Pats didnt need to cheat. Most Colts fans including myself didnt have a good feeling going into the game and not to many so called experts picked the Colts. Why the Pats were so afraid of the Colts that they felt that cheating was needed is beyond me.

bigredmechanism

01-21-2015, 04:35 PM

Red Raindog

01-21-2015, 04:45 PM

I am willing to bet that the refs were lax about checking the balls before the game. If someone deflated them on the field, there should be camera footage of it happening.

The whole thing is pretty stupid and the story is over blown.

well let's think about it -- it was raining -- let's assume the balls were kept under something like a towel to keep them from getting waterlogged --- let's visualize the size of the needle required to deflate the balls -- and we can ask how many people would film someone handling the footballs that are on the sideline --- yup -- you are right -- no way anyone could pull this off -- :rolleyes:

Roy Tucker

01-21-2015, 05:16 PM

If it's proven out that the Pats deliberately did this, I'd think the NFL has to bring down the hammer. Like suspend Belichick for a year, multimillion dollar fine, loss of high round draft picks, etcetera etc. Give them the equivalent of the Penn State/NCAA treatment.

After what NE has done in the past, they need to put some real teeth in the punishment. But the thing is, after Goodell bumbled the Ray Rice thing so bad, he may be afraid to do much.

cincrazy

01-21-2015, 07:16 PM

If Belichick is hit with a 5 year show cause penalty, I wonder what university he will be at the helm of soon.

Chip R

01-21-2015, 07:41 PM

Good thing for Belichick there isn't a videotape of them deflating the footballs. ;)

blumj

01-21-2015, 07:50 PM

Good thing for Belichick there isn't a videotape of them deflating the footballs. ;)

You sure about that?

https://vine.co/v/OIeeDPhF6q5

IslandRed

01-21-2015, 09:59 PM

If it's proven out that the Pats deliberately did this, I'd think the NFL has to bring down the hammer.

You'd like to think so. Look, I agree with pretty much everyone else, it didn't affect the outcome of the game. But it's like doctoring baseballs or corking bats -- maybe it's pretty common to fudge a little bit, more than we'd like to think, but if someone gets stone-cold caught, they can't just ignore it.

Slyder

01-21-2015, 10:10 PM

G.O.A.T Speaks:

Jerry Rice Verified account ‏@JerryRice

11 of 12 balls under-inflated can anyone spell cheating!!! #JustSaying

RedsBaron

01-21-2015, 11:22 PM

If it's proven out that the Pats deliberately did this, I'd think the NFL has to bring down the hammer. Like suspend Belichick for a year, multimillion dollar fine, loss of high round draft picks, etcetera etc. Give them the equivalent of the Penn State/NCAA treatment.

As a Green Bay fan I think the Patriots should be barred from this year's Super Bowl as punishment. To even things up I further believe the Colts should meet the Packers in the Super Bowl. Just seems fair to me. ;)

Dom Heffner

01-21-2015, 11:25 PM

They all do it, this is one of the most non story stories to come out in awhile.

They all tamper with footballs. Every single one of them.

GAC

01-22-2015, 06:06 AM

If the Colts' balls were not under inflated -- I have to believe Bellichik will be suspended -- even that is not enough in my opinion

Don't you first have to prove that Bellichick was responsible, or personally involved in some way, for the balls being under-inflated? If that's proven, then yeah, the hammer should come down.

GAC

01-22-2015, 06:10 AM

I am willing to bet that the refs were lax about checking the balls before the game. If someone deflated them on the field, there should be camera footage of it happening.

The whole thing is pretty stupid and the story is over blown.

I fully agree. But ESPN will keep it in the headlines.

Andrew Luck has stated he likes the balls over-inflated. How would he know that? Indy can't blame their simply terrible performance, or the reason they lost (got their butts kicked), on the Patriot's balls being under-inflated.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but each team is allowed to bring 12 game balls, which are inspected prior to the game, and each offense uses their own balls? The rule itself invites cheating/controversy.

That rule needs to be changed IMO.

cumberlandreds

01-22-2015, 08:48 AM

I fully agree. But ESPN will keep it in the headlines.

Andrew Luck has stated he likes the balls over-inflated. How would he know that? Indy can't blame their simply terrible performance, or the reason they lost (got their butts kicked), on the Patriot's balls being under-inflated.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but each team is allowed to bring 12 game balls, which are inspected prior to the game, and each offense uses their own balls? The rule itself invites cheating/controversy.

That rule needs to be changed IMO.

I agree with that. You would think the NFL would supply the officials,mainly the head referee,with a bag of balls for game use. He would be responsible for properly maintaining them. Then they could have an alternate ref on the sidelines acting as a guard for the balls so neither team could tamper with them as the game was going on. Boy things sure get complicated very quickly in the NFL. :)

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 09:18 AM

Don't you first have to prove that Bellichick was responsible, or personally involved in some way, for the balls being under-inflated? If that's proven, then yeah, the hammer should come down.

Proving Belichick was involved could be the tricky part. I have no doubt his grubby, corrupt paws are all over this but he reminds me of Al Capone. Its very likely he ordered it but was smart enough to cover his tracks so he personally couldn't be caught.

IslandRed

01-22-2015, 11:03 AM

I agree with that. You would think the NFL would supply the officials,mainly the head referee,with a bag of balls for game use. He would be responsible for properly maintaining them. Then they could have an alternate ref on the sidelines acting as a guard for the balls so neither team could tamper with them as the game was going on. Boy things sure get complicated very quickly in the NFL. :)

That's what happens with the designated kicking balls, they stay under the control of the officials. I guess we'll find out how serious the NFL considers this to be, by whether or not they bother to change the procedures.

Tom Servo

01-22-2015, 11:32 AM

G.O.A.T Speaks:

Jerry Rice Verified account ‏@JerryRice

11 of 12 balls under-inflated can anyone spell cheating!!! #JustSaying
Jerry Rice also thinks Bill Callahan purposely lost the Super Bowl to Tampa Bay because he hated the Raiders, so while he may be the GOAT receiver, his opinions on things tend to skew towards the ridiculous.

Caveat Emperor

01-22-2015, 11:51 AM

They all do it, this is one of the most non story stories to come out in awhile.

They all tamper with footballs. Every single one of them.

This.

And really, if the tampering was such that no one actually noticed it, how much of a competitive advantage was truly gained?

Slyder

01-22-2015, 11:52 AM

Don't you first have to prove that Bellichick was responsible, or personally involved in some way, for the balls being under-inflated? If that's proven, then yeah, the hammer should come down.

Ignorance isn't a defense. That is why they JUST suspended New Orleans coach a year for Bounty Gate. If they can prove NE purposefully did it regardless of if it was or wasn't Beli-cheat making the call.

Chip R

01-22-2015, 11:55 AM

Proving Belichick was involved could be the tricky part. I have no doubt his grubby, corrupt paws are all over this but he reminds me of Al Capone. Its very likely he ordered it but was smart enough to cover his tracks so he personally couldn't be caught.

It has been reported in the past that Belichick knows everything that goes on with the Pats. He may not have personally deflated the balls or witnessed the balls being deflated but do not doubt he knew - and condoned - what was going on. Just like Spygate. He didn't do the filming but he sure as shooting knew it was going on. Belichick can take the "Goodell Defense" and say he had no idea that was going on but that would make him either a fool or a liar.

I don't think it had an effect on the game but it's another rule that the Pats and Belichick have broken or bent. Everyone may do it but it doesn't make it right. Just like in college if a team has an ineligible player on their roster, whether the player is used or not, they are going to be penalized. Nothing except a small fine will happen though since Bob Kraft is a good friend of Goodell's and we saw what happened initially in the Ray Rice incident with BAL's owner being a good friend of Goodell's. My penalty: Suspend Belichick for the first 8 games of 2015 (not counting the Super Bowl).

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 11:55 AM

This.
. Every single one of them.
And really, if the tampering was such that no one actually noticed it, how much of a competitive advantage was truly gained?

Yep, so really if a bat is corked and no one notices it right away then we should just leave it be. Because we know all teams and players tamper with bats. Every single one of them.

Caveat Emperor

01-22-2015, 12:02 PM

Yep, so really if a bat is corked and no one notices it right away then we should just leave it be. Because we know all teams and players tamper with bats. Every single one of them.

Bad example.

The only way an umpire is going to notice a corked bat is if it shatters and he's able to inspect the contents. Otherwise, umpires don't handle the bats used by players.

Here, the referees handled the footballs used after every single play. If not one single official noticed an underinflated football (and remember, multiple officials touch the football during the course of a game), how can it be said that the level of underinflation was such that it impacted the game in any measurable way?

Tom Servo

01-22-2015, 12:08 PM

Ignorance isn't a defense. That is why they JUST suspended New Orleans coach a year for Bounty Gate. If they can prove NE purposefully did it regardless of if it was or wasn't Beli-cheat making the call.
The bounty thing is entirely different, much as people want to compare them. And there were no pleas of ignorance there, everyone in the Saints was well aware of it.

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 12:10 PM

Bad example.

The only way an umpire is going to notice a corked bat is if it shatters and he's able to inspect the contents. Otherwise, umpires don't handle the bats used by players.

Here, the referees handled the footballs used after every single play. If not one single official noticed an underinflated football (and remember, multiple officials touch the football during the course of a game), how can it be said that the level of underinflation was such that it impacted the game in any measurable way?

Refs do not throw the balls like the players do. Throwing the ball with less air may not make a huge difference, but it will make enough of a difference to question the integrity of the game.

Afterall if it didnt make a difference, why would NE risk doing it and getting caught?

westofyou

01-22-2015, 12:19 PM

Bad example.

The only way an umpire is going to notice a corked bat is if it shatters and he's able to inspect the contents. Otherwise, umpires don't handle the bats used by players.

Here, the referees handled the footballs used after every single play. If not one single official noticed an underinflated football (and remember, multiple officials touch the football during the course of a game), how can it be said that the level of underinflation was such that it impacted the game in any measurable way?

What about baseballs?

The late 60's CWS kept their balls in a basement in Comiskey that was dank and the boxes the balls were in would fall apart from the moisture they wold take on, making a heavier ball. The Sox had a crappy hitting team, GB pitchers and tall grass and a wet sandy area in front of the plate. Definite advantage, yet wasn't illegal under the rules of the day. Of course the umpires were given the game balls and handled them the whole time.

Caveat Emperor

01-22-2015, 12:27 PM

What about baseballs?

The late 60's CWS kept their balls in a basement in Comiskey that was dank and the boxes the balls were in would fall apart from the moisture they wold take on, making a heavier ball. The Sox had a crappy hitting team, GB pitchers and tall grass and a wet sandy area in front of the plate. Definite advantage, yet wasn't illegal under the rules of the day. Of course the umpires were given the game balls and handled them the whole time.

They also said Connie Mack had a habit of storing baseballs in the freezer so that the core would still be dead and cold after the outside had returned to "normal" temperatures for game-time.

westofyou

01-22-2015, 12:36 PM

They also said Connie Mack had a habit of storing baseballs in the freezer so that the core would still be dead and cold after the outside had returned to "normal" temperatures for game-time.

Until the 1890's teams would employ ball boys to handle the balls and pass them on to the players. They would retrieve foul balls and wrestle them from the fans (who returned them like they do in soccer) In Philadelphia the AA A's would take balls and beat the crap out of them with bats, softening them up (Ball had no cork center until 1911) The boys would keep them in their pockets and use them to return to their team (thus limiting the hitting of the visitors) When this was found out the league made the rule that the umpire needed to handle the game balls and transfer them to the players.

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 01:12 PM

Gosh, all the Dolphins or any other team need to do to make it to the Super Bowl is to just deflate some footballs.

That's the key, all these years, who knew.

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 01:27 PM

This.

And really, if the tampering was such that no one actually noticed it, how much of a competitive advantage was truly gained?

Right- the NFL has rules but that doesn't mean breaking one gives you a huge advantage.

The Colts scored 7 points with their "regulation" football.

I really don't know that I would enjoy watching the NFL if the QBs had trouble gripping the ball. I dunno...why are we trying to make the product more slippery or tougher to grip?

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 01:29 PM

Gosh, all the Dolphins or any other team need to do to make it to the Super Bowl is to just deflate some footballs.

That's the key, all these years, who knew.

No one is saying deflating footballs is why the Pats made it to the SB. In fact I agree whole heartedly the Pats are a far better team than the Colts with legal footballs. This simply is about a team that broke the rules to win. Some may think breaking rules and cheating is no big deal and doesnt bring into question a sports integrity and there are those who think it is a big deal. I side with the latter.

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 01:34 PM

I really don't know that I would enjoy watching the NFL if the QBs had trouble gripping the ball. I dunno...why are we trying to make the product more slippery or tougher to grip?

Because one team the Pats decided to break the rules and use a football that was not gripable while another team the Colts did not which gave them a distinct disadvantage.

If you want the NFL to change the rule and allow deflated balls if it rains then I am fine with it but allow both teams to do it.

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 01:38 PM

No one is saying deflating footballs is why the Pats made it to the SB. In fact I agree whole heartedly the Pats are a far better team than the Colts with legal footballs. This simply is about a team that broke the rules to win. Some may think breaking rules and cheating is no big deal and doesnt bring into question a sports integrity is no big deal and there are those who think it is a big deal. I side with the latter.

I don't think it is an either-or as you are saying.

I think cheating is a big deal- I mean, look at how I've treated the steroid issue.

From what other QB's are saying, the NFL dictates how the balls are inflated but they all have different sized hands and styles to where they have different preferences. Aaron Rodgers thinks he should be able to blow that thing up as much as he wants.

Tom Brady apparently prefers his footballs under-inflated for the size of his hands. I...really don't think this issue is one that is keeping other players out of the league or is turning guys into super quarterbacks.

I wouldn't want the kickers under-inflating balls for short field goals, or the Patriots slipping a dead ball to the Colts for a kickoff.

This just doesn't outrage me. I think people are tired of the Patriots being good. I think they are jealous. Nobody is screaming about Brad Johnson paying someone $7500 to scuff footballs up for him. He isn't going to go down as a cheater.

Rules are rules but they all aren't equal.

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 01:39 PM

Because one team the Pats decided to break the rules and use a football that was not gripable while another team the Colts did not which gave them a distinct disadvantage.

If you want the NFL to change the rule and allow deflated balls if it rains then I am fine with it but allow both teams to do it.

Right but what is grippable to each player is determined by the QB. Brady could be doing this every game, it may have nothing to do with the rain. Didn't the Ravens tip the Colts off? Did they know it was going to rain?

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 01:52 PM

I don't think it is an either-or as you are saying.

I think cheating is a big deal- I mean, look at how I've treated the steroid issue.

From what other QB's are saying, the NFL dictates how the balls are inflated but they all have different sized hands and styles to where they have different preferences. Aaron Rodgers thinks he should be able to blow that thing up as much as he wants.

Tom Brady apparently prefers his footballs under-inflated for the size of his hands. I...really don't think this issue is one that is keeping other players out of the league or is turning guys into super quarterbacks.

I wouldn't want the kickers under-inflating balls for short field goals, or the Patriots slipping a dead ball to the Colts for a kickoff.

This just doesn't outrage me. I think people are tired of the Patriots being good. I think they are jealous. Nobody is screaming about Brad Johnson paying someone $7500 to scuff footballs up for him. He isn't going to go down as a cheater.

Rules are rules but they all aren't equal.

I am sure pitchers with smaller size hands may prefer a different size baseball than those with larger type hands. Do we change the rules to accomodate them?

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 02:00 PM

I am sure pitchers with smaller size hands may prefer a different size baseball than those with larger type hands. Do we change the rules to accomodate them?

Baseballs are not filled with air.

The NFL does not dictate a certain size, they give a range.

If a game is played in subzero conditions, the pressure in the ball changes- should we call time out until the temps go up?

In the old days the NFL could bring in brand new balls at any point in the game, which are notoriously difficult to grip. Was that fair if you got a brand new ball and your opponent didn't?

If this is such a big deal ripe for cheating, why on earth is the NFL letting each team bring their own footballs?

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 02:22 PM

If this is such a big deal ripe for cheating, why on earth is the NFL letting each team bring their own footballs?

Well one things for sure is I bet that changes. The NFL is not going to allow the question of integrity to be brought up like it has with this scandal in future games.

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 02:34 PM

Well one things for sure is I bet that changes. The NFL is not going to allow the question of integrity to be brought up like it has with this scandal in future games.

I don't want to dismiss your point- but when I see QB's talking about this, they aren't outraged at all, they are coming to the defense of Brady for the most part.

If this were something that were a major issue you'd have QB's saying I NEVER do that because it's CHEATING....and why should he get away with it....punish him.

They aren't saying anything like that at all. In fact I think we're getting an idea of just how much they each have preferences of footballs.

I just don't want to get into prison sentence for a parking ticket territory, which the Pats are getting from a lot of sides.

Mike Tomlin stepping on a field during a play was lose a first round draft pick type stuff (yeah, right). This feels like a $25,000 fine to me.

George Anderson

01-22-2015, 03:17 PM

I don't want to dismiss your point- but when I see QB's talking about this, they aren't outraged at all, they are coming to the defense of Brady for the most part.

If this were something that were a major issue you'd have QB's saying I NEVER do that because it's CHEATING....and why should he get away with it....punish him.

They aren't saying anything like that at all. In fact I think we're getting an idea of just how much they each have preferences of footballs.

I just don't want to get into prison sentence for a parking ticket territory, which the Pats are getting from a lot of sides.

Mike Tomlin stepping on a field during a play was lose a first round draft pick type stuff (yeah, right). This feels like a $25,000 fine to me.

You also do not see baseball players outraged when a player gets caught with a corked bat or a pitcher is caught with vaseline or a razor etc... It still doesn't make it right if other players are not outraged.

I compare this whole thing to basically getting caught corking a bat in baseball or a pitcher getting caught defacing a ball. Sure its bad but its not to the same level of what our very own Peter Edward Rose did or also PEDs. But what makes this instance as newsworthy as it has become is because it happened in the playoffs and NE has been caught before.

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 03:23 PM

It give us this line, if nothing else:

Reportedly, the Colts' Sunday suspicions were confirmed the first time they got their hands on one of Brady's balls

http://deadspin.com/report-nfl-was-aware-of-patriots-deflation-allegations-1680914291

cumberlandreds

01-22-2015, 03:37 PM

It's give us this line, if nothing else:

http://deadspin.com/report-nfl-was-aware-of-patriots-deflation-allegations-1680914291

Gisele is jealous.

Roy Tucker

01-22-2015, 03:50 PM

It give us this line, if nothing else:

http://deadspin.com/report-nfl-was-aware-of-patriots-deflation-allegations-1680914291

Reminds me of the purported Dizzy Dean line when he spotted a couple smooching in the stands "he kisses her on the strikes and she kisses him on the balls".

Dom Heffner

01-22-2015, 03:52 PM

It's so funny when it's unintentional.

There was a thread we had on here maybe five years ago that I was posting in and I got a private message from someone thanking me for all the double entendre lines regarding balls.

They were like, "Classic!"

I had no clue I was even doing it lol....

Razor Shines

01-22-2015, 06:55 PM

As a Colts fan, in terms of that game, I don't care. The Colts were disgusting, they got outplayed in every way. It didn't matter.

As an NFL fan I don't know how big of a deal it is. Seems like it's not nothing. People saying it should just be swept aside are mildly annoying.

RedsBaron

01-22-2015, 07:33 PM

It give us this line, if nothing else:

http://deadspin.com/report-nfl-was-aware-of-patriots-deflation-allegations-1680914291
Shouldn't a penalty have been called? :)

WVRed

01-22-2015, 07:34 PM

I kinda wonder if all of this started with the Cincy game. Coming into that game, talk was that Brady was past his prime and the downfall of the Patriots. That was when New England's run started.

Makes sense when you consider everything, and Belichick and Brady stopping at nothing to win.

Tom Servo

01-22-2015, 07:39 PM

nmculbreth

01-22-2015, 07:48 PM

Razor Shines

01-22-2015, 09:16 PM

Can we please start deflating Andy Dalton's balls?

Oh please. The way the media talks about him if they're not already deflated, it ain't gonna happen.

Tom Servo

01-22-2015, 09:21 PM

So apparently the whole "D'Qwell Jackson's interception is what led to the accusations" thing wasn't the case.

Until Jackson gets it back, though, he at least wants to make something very clear: He did not intend to prompt the investigation. Jackson says he actually did not even know the ball was taken or that the controversy existed until he was being driven home from the team's charter plane after the Colts had arrived in Indianapolis.

"I wouldn't know how that could even be an advantage or a disadvantage," Jackson said. "I definitely wouldn't be able to tell if one ball had less pressure than another."

Jackson also said he holds no bitter feelings toward the Patriots -- nor does he feel his team was cheated -- if indeed New England deliberately deflated the footballs.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000462315/article/dqwell-jackson-footballs-didnt-change-outcome

Simon Rhymon

01-22-2015, 11:45 PM

Just heard Theisman ask that if the Ravens warned the Colts, why wasn't the league involved or why did they take no action after the Ravens - Pats game? Good question.

Simon Rhymon

01-22-2015, 11:48 PM

Stray

01-23-2015, 12:41 AM

KronoRed

01-23-2015, 05:19 AM

GAC

01-23-2015, 05:37 AM

Ignorance isn't a defense. That is why they JUST suspended New Orleans coach a year for Bounty Gate. If they can prove NE purposefully did it regardless of if it was or wasn't Beli-cheat making the call.

I'm not pleading ignorance in Bellichick's case. Only that they must discover evidence that he was involved, had knowledge. In Bountygate, there was no ignorance on Payton's part. At least not according to the NFL's investigation that concluded that head coach Payton tried to cover up the scheme, and that he, as well as the GM, failed to shut it down when ordered so by the owner.

There are some questions that need to be answered here ....

#1 ... did the officiating crew do their job and properly inspect/verify the balls prior to the game? If they did not, for whatever reasons, then that pretty much brings this investigation to a dead-end IMO, unless evidence surfaces that during the game someone from the Patriots did tamper with the balls.

Bellichick has stated he had no knowledge of this situation. Whether that is true or not I don't know; but he's putting his neck on the line (coaching job, and further damage to his rep) if he did know or was involved. I doubt if someone else did tamper with the balls, and did so under Bellichick's orders - and it's found out - that person will take the fall completely without ratting out Bellichick or whoever.

But I'm not going to pronounce, or assume, he's guilty just because of what happened back in 2007, or because I may not like the guy to begin with.

I'll wait to see what the results of the investigation are.

IMO though, there's one person for sure who KNEW those balls were under-inflated ....... Tom Brady. Is anything going to happen to him?

When's all said and done though I see the ball boy getting 5-10. :lol:

blumj

01-23-2015, 06:12 AM

Well since the only reason the Patriots beat the Bengals in week 5 was because of deflated footballs, lets change that L to a W, give the Bengals a 1st round bye and lets redo the playoffs to be sure.
Those Brady/Youkilis family dinners are going to be a disaster if Brady cheated when they played the Bengals.

traderumor

01-23-2015, 09:00 AM

George Anderson

01-23-2015, 09:36 AM

I

IMO though, there's one person for sure who KNEW those balls were under-inflated ....... Tom Brady. Is anything going to happen to him?
l:

I think at the very least Bradys reputation and legacy are damaged. Any talk about him being one of the greatest QBs of all time will always have this blemish attached to it.

Sea Ray

01-23-2015, 09:39 AM

I think at the very least Bradys reputation and legacy are damaged. Any talk about him being one of the greatest QBs of all time will always have this blemish attached to it.

I don't see how they'll ever trace this to Brady. If some ball boy writes a book someday, maybe but unless some connection to Brady comes from the NFL's investigation then I don't think this sticks

George Anderson

01-23-2015, 09:49 AM

I don't see how they'll ever trace this to Brady. If some ball boy writes a book someday, maybe but unless some connection to Brady comes from the NFL's investigation then I don't think this sticks

There are many articles all over the bet with QB after QB saying he had to know. You dont throw a certain size football forever and then suddenly have a different size one without noticing a difference.

Dom Heffner

01-23-2015, 09:55 AM

I don't see how they'll ever trace this to Brady. If some ball boy writes a book someday, maybe but unless some connection to Brady comes from the NFL's investigation then I don't think this sticks

I think it's traced to him because he's the one who benefits from it, from a public relations standpoint anyway. I think it's pretty obvious he knew. To expect him to admit it on national television is silly.

Given all the QB's who are coming out and saying "So what?," I doubt this sticks to him. Flags fly forever, though they may not be adding one this go 'round.

WrongVerb

01-23-2015, 10:48 AM

Sea Ray

01-23-2015, 11:21 AM

There are many articles all over the bet with QB after QB saying he had to know. You dont throw a certain size football forever and then suddenly have a different size one without noticing a difference.

Those other QBs are also saying that this goes on all the time and that it's no big deal. Unless they can find a ball boy that admits that Brady has him deflate them then this won't stick.

Have they looked into the possibility that officials are lax in checking air pressure when inspecting balls before a game?

I don't see this affecting Brady anymore than pine tar affected George Brett's legacy

George Anderson

01-23-2015, 11:24 AM

Those other QBs are also saying that this goes on all the time and that it's no big deal. Unless they can find a ball boy that admits that Brady has him deflate them then this won't stick.

Have they looked into the possibility that officials are lax in checking air pressure when inspecting balls before a game?

I don't see this affecting Brady anymore than pine tar affected George Brett's legacy

What QBs are saying this goes on all the time and it is no big deal?

Sea Ray

01-23-2015, 11:36 AM

What QBs are saying this goes on all the time and it is no big deal?

Since news broke on Sunday night that the New England Patriots were under investigation for reportedly deflating footballs prior to the AFC Championship game, people all over the football world have weighed in. And while many have expressed shock and outrage over “Deflategate,” those within the game say the practice is widespread at all levels of the game.

http://www.newburyportnews.com/news/local_news/deflating-footballs-common-at-all-levels-local-coaches-say/article_1d3c46c9-51f4-5e4e-8e81-c1fe42d041b0.html

Ask any Qb In the league, this is ridiculous!! — Matt Leinart (@MattLeinartQB) January 21, 2015 Former Tampa Bay Bucs quarterback Brad Johnson openly admitted to paying "some guys" $7,500 to make footballs easier to grip before the Super Bowl. So maybe this sort of thing happens all the time. It's possible that the Patriots were just taking a common practice to a new level.

See more at: http://www.bullfax.com/?q=node-no-one-can-figure-out-how-patriots-balls-got-deflated-a#sthash.m19Qb38j.dpuf

Is this really the first time you've heard this? What I'm getting out of this is that retired QBs are coming forward with this truth yet the active ones don't dare. They have to give the politically correct answer

Tom Servo

01-23-2015, 11:43 AM

What QBs are saying this goes on all the time and it is no big deal?
Rich Gannon, Boomer Esiason, Matt Leinart, Steve Beuerlein

Conversely Mark Brunell did practically cry on TV yesterday talking about it, which makes me think he has some bigger issues to work through.

Caveat Emperor

01-23-2015, 11:45 AM

I am sure pitchers with smaller size hands may prefer a different size baseball than those with larger type hands. Do we change the rules to accomodate them?

George Anderson

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location Indianapolis
Posts: 4,786

Ah, I see why this is a big deal now. ;)

George Anderson

01-23-2015, 11:50 AM

George Anderson

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location Indianapolis
Posts: 4,786

Ah, I see why this is a big deal now. ;)

Integrity has nothing to do with where I live.

Tom Servo

01-23-2015, 11:57 AM

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1350&dat=19790807&id=Dw0wAAAAIBAJ&sjid=iAIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4822,4960418

bigredmechanism

01-23-2015, 12:02 PM

Rich Gannon, Boomer Esiason, Matt Leinart, Steve Beuerlein

Conversely Mark Brunell did practically cry on TV yesterday talking about it, which makes me think he has some bigger issues to work through.

Mark Brunell crying about 1 PSI was the weirdest thing I've seen so far in 2015.

ESPN is ruining sports with the way they (and their commentators) create and drive narratives.

George Anderson

01-23-2015, 12:08 PM

Rich Gannon, Boomer Esiason, Matt Leinart, Steve Beuerlein

Conversely Mark Brunell did practically cry on TV yesterday talking about it, which makes me think he has some bigger issues to work through.

Well if deflated footballs are no big deal because 5 or 6 ex QBs say so then lets just get rid of the rule. Change the rule to allow the football to be any air pressure the QB wants since its no big deal.

Dom Heffner

01-23-2015, 12:13 PM

The real issue is not "how much advantage did this give the Patriots," but that it is yet another egregious example of the organization, whoever is to blame, doing things against the rules, big or small, to get a competitive advantage. The point seems to me "what are they doing that was or has not yet been discovered?" This item may be akin to a millionaire having a few thousand of unsubstantiated deductions, but a good auditor would say, "hmmmm, I wonder if there is more," so you start digging.

And Bellicheck's denial, he has absolutely no believability. He is a known cheater and has no integrity. His word is worthless.

The real issue is not "how much advantage did this give the Patriots," but that it is yet another egregious example of the organization, whoever is to blame, doing things against the rules, big or small, to get a competitive advantage.

Rules are rules, but the way this is framed is not very fair.

As many quarterbacks-Hall of Fame quarterbacks- are saying, many teams do this. This is not another "egregious" example if everyone is doing it. Or if many people do it. I believe some cheating is worse than others, and I also believe that every instance of rule breaking is not necessarily cheating.

The point seems to me "what are they doing that was or has not yet been discovered?"

Ah, the slippery slope. You have sped in an automobile in your life, what else are you up to?

Tom Brady isn't going to admit to doing this- there's what, a $25,000 fine attached? So no, he isn't going to man up. You'll notice all the manning up is coming from people who are in no danger of being fined or punished. But there's lots of guys saying it. Leinart said they all do it.

Is Brad Johnson a cheater? Should we take away his Super Bowl ring? What else was he up to? You think he spiked the water bottles?

We are all admitting that the Colts could not have have beaten the Patriots if the ball were the size of a baseball, so the outrage over something that isn't effecting the outcome of the game seems to be being mad over stuff for the sake of being mad. Oh they think they are entitled. Right. They think they are entitled to do something that doesn't affect the outcome of the game.

Again- I'm not throwing someone in jail for a parking ticket. And that's why if I'm the Patriots, I'm paying coy with this, because an admission is throwing yourself to a pack of hungry wolves who are going to overeat for the sake of overeating.

Come down off the pedestal, your favorite player has not followed every rule to the tee every single play of his life.

Chip R

01-23-2015, 12:41 PM

I'm certainly no Patriots apologist. In fact, I'm kind of enjoying that they need to deal with this instead of preparing to beat the Seahawks (whom I'll be rooting for). But I do want to say a few things. First off, I think that this whole thing is way, way overblown, given the circumstances of the game and the scoring. Second, I think the Patriots end up with a slap-on-the-wrist fine and maybe lose a 7th round draft pick. Thirdly, I think the fault lies with the NFL for having rules that allow the teams to maintain their own footballs. People much smarter about such things than any of us should look into that and make necessary changes so that the integrity of the game is maintained. Lastly, that integrity bit...always try to remember that football enjoys the popularity it has because of legal sports bettors and fantasy junkies. If anything makes those folks question the integrity of the game, you'll lose them and the popularity will wane. The NFL cannot allow that to happen.

You make some good points, Dan. However, it doesn't matter if the score was 3-0 or 100-0, footballs were tampered with by NE to give them an illegal advantage. It probably didn't affect the game but it was against the rules. Also, it wasn't just one or two balls, it was 11 of the 12 they had that were deflated. Maybe it's not a big deal but if it doesn't affect the game, why do it? It was no accident and no coincidence. It's another example of NE and Belichick playing fast and loose with the rules. I do agree they will end up with a slap on the wrist - until the video comes out. ;) It's funny how an organization like the NFL which is so rigid in its rules and customs and such doesn't maintain control over the footballs.

I disagree that the popularity of the game is affected. Quite the contrary, I think it enhances it. If there was no controversy there wouldn't be much news this week. Now this is the only thing anyone can talk about. Not that the Super Bowl is lacking in viewers but don't you think people are going to tune in to see if the balls are deflated or what dirty trick the Pats will try next? Even the Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson controversies add to the popularity of the game.

Dom Heffner

01-23-2015, 12:49 PM

From a former Patriots employee, take it with a grain, I guess:

I spoke to someone who is very familiar with the Pats' practice and game-day handling of their game balls -- someone no longer a member of the organization who has no stake in the outcome of this investigation one way or another -- who was adamant that there had never been any sort of protocol about deflating balls in the rain or certain conditions.

"We would practice in the rain, Bill would throw water on dry balls during practice and there was never anything done to deflate them because of it being wet," the former Patriot said. "That doesn't even make any sense. As anal as Tom is about the balls, there's no way he'd let some ball boy or whatever try to deflate it to a certain PSI.

"Tom knows a football, and the way he wants it, like you or I would know a kid. But there was never anything deflating or doctoring balls during a game. He knows how he wants the ball going into a game and he's not going to take any chances of someone else messing around with a ball to get it right. As anal as he is about the way he wants the balls to be, he's not going to able to tell the difference of 1 psi or whatever.

"I'm just telling you, that's not how it works. He wants those balls to be right going into the game. But D'Qwell Jackson could tell after he intercepts a ball and is running to the sidelines? It just doesn't add up to me."

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/24982082/as-deflategate-unfolds-we-find-doctoring-nfl-footballs-is-nothing-new

Sea Ray

01-23-2015, 02:15 PM

Well if deflated footballs are no big deal because 5 or 6 ex QBs say so then lets just get rid of the rule. Change the rule to allow the football to be any air pressure the QB wants since its no big deal.

That's not the way to handle it. if it's a big deal then teams should not have access to the game balls. That's what I learned from all of this. I had no idea. You have experience umpiring baseball games. This would be like allowing every pitcher to have his own bag of balls that he pitches with. Everytime there's a pitching change, you as the home plate umpire would have to empty your pocket of balls and replace them with the new pitcher's balls. It's nuts

traderumor

01-23-2015, 02:18 PM

Rules are rules, but the way this is framed is not very fair.

As many quarterbacks-Hall of Fame quarterbacks- are saying, many teams do this. This is not another "egregious" example if everyone is doing it. Or if many people do it. I believe some cheating is worse than others, and I also believe that every instance of rule breaking is not necessarily cheating.

Ah, the slippery slope. You have sped in an automobile in your life, what else are you up to?

Tom Brady isn't going to admit to doing this- there's what, a $25,000 fine attached? So no, he isn't going to man up. You'll notice all the manning up is coming from people who are in no danger of being fined or punished. But there's lots of guys saying it. Leinart said they all do it.

Is Brad Johnson a cheater? Should we take away his Super Bowl ring? What else was he up to? You think he spiked the water bottles?

We are all admitting that the Colts could not have have beaten the Patriots if the ball were the size of a baseball, so the outrage over something that isn't effecting the outcome of the game seems to be being mad over stuff for the sake of being mad. Oh they think they are entitled. Right. They think they are entitled to do something that doesn't affect the outcome of the game.

Again- I'm not throwing someone in jail for a parking ticket. And that's why if I'm the Patriots, I'm paying coy with this, because an admission is throwing yourself to a pack of hungry wolves who are going to overeat for the sake of overeating.

Come down off the pedestal, your favorite player has not followed every rule to the tee every single play of his life.Be careful with your slippery slope claim, any investigator who doesn't think that way will not be a very successful investigator, not to mention its a legitimate question. You may operate in the "little sins vs. big sins" worldview, but how about the cliche "where there's smoke, there's fire." It just happens all the time. Murder cases often turn on "little mistakes" made by the criminal. So....I'm not sure pulling out the slippery slope trump card works real well here.

BTW, when I was arrested for a DWI, I had gotten pulled over for speeding. Oh, that slippery slope.

Sea Ray

01-23-2015, 02:18 PM

You make some good points, Dan. However, it doesn't matter if the score was 3-0 or 100-0, footballs were tampered with by NE to give them an illegal advantage.

I don't think we know that as a fact yet. I'd sure like to know how they deflated 11 balls before I'm sure that NE was guilty

traderumor

01-23-2015, 02:23 PM

I don't think we know that as a fact yet. I'd sure like to know how they deflated 11 balls before I'm sure that NE was guiltyWith a needle.

Sea Ray

01-23-2015, 02:48 PM

With a needle.

How do you know that was the instrument they used? I hadn't heard that reported anywhere

traderumor

01-23-2015, 03:40 PM

How do you know that was the instrument they used? I hadn't heard that reported anywhere

Seriously? Butch Wilfork sucked out the air? He did look a little bloated in that Onion picture.

Razor Shines

01-23-2015, 05:55 PM

George Anderson

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location Indianapolis
Posts: 4,786

Ah, I see why this is a big deal now. ;)

Investigation's over. You solved the case.

Chip R

01-23-2015, 06:04 PM

Investigation's over. You solved the case.

8505

George Anderson

01-23-2015, 06:37 PM

Investigation's over. You solved the case.

Its funny how some here think people like me are just a disgruntled Colts fan. I am not sure if anyone knows it or not but I am also a Cincinnati Reds fan so naturally I should be on the Pete Rose got screwed bandwagon, right? It will be a cold day in hell when that happens because integrity and honor take precedent to me over who my favorite team is.

Dom Heffner

01-23-2015, 07:34 PM

Be careful with your slippery slope claim, any investigator who doesn't think that way will not be a very successful investigator, not to mention its a legitimate question. You may operate in the "little sins vs. big sins" worldview, but how about the cliche "where there's smoke, there's fire." It just happens all the time. Murder cases often turn on "little mistakes" made by the criminal. So....I'm not sure pulling out the slippery slope trump card works real well here.

BTW, when I was arrested for a DWI, I had gotten pulled over for speeding. Oh, that slippery slope.

Do you have any proof or evidence of cheating? If not, this is conjecture.

I don't know if the Pats are doing anything else but let me throw it out there because of this ball "scandal."

So you were speeding and drinking? Well gosh, what other laws were you breaking?

Dom Heffner

01-23-2015, 07:38 PM

Its funny how some here think people like me are just a disgruntled Colts fan. I am not sure if anyone knows it or not but I am also a Cincinnati Reds fan so naturally I should be on the Pete Rose got screwed bandwagon, right? It will be a cold day in hell when that happens because integrity and honor take precedent to me over who my favorite team is.

I don't think you 're disgruntled I think you are a "rules are rules guy." I get it.

This whole thing is all feeling like a cop who would give a ticket for going 36 in a 35, give a lecture about the importance of speed, and though "right," really not changing one thing about anything.

George Anderson

01-23-2015, 07:48 PM

Do you have any proof or evidence of cheating? If not, this is conjecture.

I don't know if the Pats are doing anything else but let me throw it out there because of this ball "scandal."

So you were speeding and drinking? Well gosh, what other laws were you breaking?

When the person pulled over has the reputation of not wanting to follow the rules of the league like one Bill Belicheck. It stands good reason to wonder what else he has been up to.

Slyder

01-24-2015, 02:39 AM

You make some good points, Dan. However, it doesn't matter if the score was 3-0 or 100-0, footballs were tampered with by NE to give them an illegal advantage. It probably didn't affect the game but it was against the rules. Also, it wasn't just one or two balls, it was 11 of the 12 they had that were deflated. Maybe it's not a big deal but if it doesn't affect the game, why do it? It was no accident and no coincidence. It's another example of NE and Belichick playing fast and loose with the rules. I do agree they will end up with a slap on the wrist - until the video comes out. ;) It's funny how an organization like the NFL which is so rigid in its rules and customs and such doesn't maintain control over the footballs.

I disagree that the popularity of the game is affected. Quite the contrary, I think it enhances it. If there was no controversy there wouldn't be much news this week. Now this is the only thing anyone can talk about. Not that the Super Bowl is lacking in viewers but don't you think people are going to tune in to see if the balls are deflated or what dirty trick the Pats will try next? Even the Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson controversies add to the popularity of the game.

In a year where we have seen bad PR, after bad PR, and screw up, after screw up. This stuff does not happen in a vacuum. Boxing went through the same thing when the integrity of the sport got deteriorated and people just stopped caring. It didn't happen over night, it happened over the course of years. This commish has been exposed as an outright joke "Ignorance isn't a defense" hands Payton a year... and then claims ignorance over the Ray Rice video... Hypocrite of the highest order if you ask me. You eventually burn out the fans if thats all they hear about. Instead of talking about the Super Bowl we are talking about PSI in FOOTBALLS because a franchise runs so loose and fast with the rules! 1 is an accident, 11 is purposeful.

The NFL is more worried about cleat color and fining guys because they didn't wear their socks a particular way than to protect the integrity of the contest. Multiple PLAYOFF games have had HUGE game changing calls due to ineptness of officials, vast ridiculousness of the rules, and general ineptness of the game day policy (allowing teams to have access to game balls after they have been checked by NFL officials). That doesn't even bring into account the shear ugliness that the game is played in because they have 10,230,032 different penalties setup to try and encourage the ugly ass 42-40 Madden scores or concussions!

At some point you are going to start losing fans, the NFL NEEDS to overhaul the entire process from officials, to game day stuff (making ball people employees of NFL rather than the team for example), simplify the ENTIRE rule book, and get out of the business of fining people for stupid crap like not talking to the media, wearing the wrong color cleats, or what headphones they wear pregame.

GAC

01-24-2015, 06:43 AM

Integrity has nothing to do with where I live.

I agree George. I've read many of your posts and you've been pretty fair and objective, so there is no reason to attack you because you live in Indianapolis.

Even with Luck (and Hilton), IMO, the Colts just didn't seem to have enough weapons - relied too much on Andrew - and I didn't think they would go far. Their running game, which was sorely lacking most of the seson, started to revive somewhat with Herron. The Patriots, again in my opinion, didn't need to cheat to beat them.

But here is something that I read this morning that I didn't know.....

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/12217564/nfl-conducting-investigation-claim-new-england-patriots-used-underinflated-footballs

While the evidence thus far supports the conclusion that footballs that were underinflated 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 read.

The Pats scored 17 pts in the first half, with the under-inflated balls .... but then went wild in the second half scoring 28 pts with the properly inflated balls.

So my question is (I guess), while not condoning any illegal activity, or saying they shouldn't be investigating it - "Does it really make that much of a difference?"

Red Raindog

01-24-2015, 08:02 AM

Lots of stats here -- shows the Pats are and have been off the charts in fumble avoidance for quite a few years now -- even more crazy off the charts when compared to outdoor playing teams--- mean anything? IMO it does add to the suspicion.....

I have no idea while I'm getting a cached copy of the page...

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/?p=2932

Assembly Hall

01-24-2015, 09:29 AM

Does anyone here remember the "snow plow" incident the Patriots did on the Dolphins back in the day? Ever since that blatant advantage I disdain the Pats. Anymore I hate them more than I do the Steelers and the Cowboys.

Sea Ray

01-24-2015, 09:48 AM

Do you have any proof or evidence of cheating? If not, this is conjecture.

I don't know if the Pats are doing anything else but let me throw it out there because of this ball "scandal."

So you were speeding and drinking? Well gosh, what other laws were you breaking?

The NFL does need proof. It's not enough to say 11 out of 12 footballs were underflated thus NE is guilty. If that was the case then the NFL would not be carrying out this protracted investigation

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 10:28 AM

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 10:30 AM

The NFL does need proof. It's not enough to say 11 out of 12 footballs were underflated thus NE is guilty. If that was the case then the NFL would not be carrying out this protracted investigation

Yes, and I was pointing out that Traderumor doesn't have evidence of anything else, thus "What else are they up to" is slippery slope reasoning.

Assembly Hall

01-24-2015, 10:37 AM

Yes, and I was pointing out that Traderumor doesn't have evidence of anything else, thus "What else are they up to" is slippery slope reasoning.

I would counter with what this regime has done in the past. I raise an eyebrow to it. Funny how history repeats itself.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 10:46 AM

I would counter with what this regime has done in the past. I raise an eyebrow to it. Funny how history repeats itself.

Many teams alter footballs based on preference- I wonder what else they're up to.

Assembly Hall

01-24-2015, 10:55 AM

Many teams alter footballs based on preference- I wonder what else they're up to.

Well in the Pat's case, I hope their scouts aren't out there ready to draft another murderer.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 10:58 AM

Well in the Pat's case, I hope their scouts aren't out there ready to draft another murderer.

See? It's about the hatred of winning, not cheating.

We're all turning into Marv Levy, 1988.

George Anderson

01-24-2015, 10:59 AM

I agree George. I've read many of your posts and you've been pretty fair and objective, so there is no reason to attack you because you live in Indianapolis.

Even with Luck (and Hilton), IMO, the Colts just didn't seem to have enough weapons - relied too much on Andrew - and I didn't think they would go far. Their running game, which was sorely lacking most of the seson, started to revive somewhat with Herron. The Patriots, again in my opinion, didn't need to cheat to beat them.

But here is something that I read this morning that I didn't know.....

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/12217564/nfl-conducting-investigation-claim-new-england-patriots-used-underinflated-footballs

The Pats scored 17 pts in the first half, with the under-inflated balls .... but then went wild in the second half scoring 28 pts with the properly inflated balls.

So my question is (I guess), while not condoning any illegal activity, or saying they shouldn't be investigating it - "Does it really make that much of a difference?"

If a pitcher is getting rocked and all of a sudden an emory board is found in his glove. Do the umpires just say "oh never mind, we are not going to eject you because your doing lousy anyway"??

The Pats would of likely beat the Colts 9 times out of 10 if they played them. The Pats were better and they have our number.

The thing about the 2nd half that people are bringing up about the Pats playing better with the properly inflated balls is maybe the Colts just really sucked the 2nd half or the Pats played even better with the proper football. Maybe they would have really drubbed the Colts even more in the 2nd half if they had the deflated football.

The bottom line is they should have just played by the rules and we never would have these "what if" questions.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 11:08 AM

In a year where we have seen bad PR, after bad PR, and screw up, after screw up. This stuff does not happen in a vacuum. Boxing went through the same thing when the integrity of the sport got deteriorated and people just stopped caring. It didn't happen over night, it happened over the course of years. This commish has been exposed as an outright joke "Ignorance isn't a defense" hands Payton a year... and then claims ignorance over the Ray Rice video... Hypocrite of the highest order if you ask me. You eventually burn out the fans if thats all they hear about. Instead of talking about the Super Bowl we are talking about PSI in FOOTBALLS because a franchise runs so loose and fast with the rules! 1 is an accident, 11 is purposeful.

The NFL is more worried about cleat color and fining guys because they didn't wear their socks a particular way than to protect the integrity of the contest. Multiple PLAYOFF games have had HUGE game changing calls due to ineptness of officials, vast ridiculousness of the rules, and general ineptness of the game day policy (allowing teams to have access to game balls after they have been checked by NFL officials). That doesn't even bring into account the shear ugliness that the game is played in because they have 10,230,032 different penalties setup to try and encourage the ugly ass 42-40 Madden scores or concussions!

At some point you are going to start losing fans, the NFL NEEDS to overhaul the entire process from officials, to game day stuff (making ball people employees of NFL rather than the team for example), simplify the ENTIRE rule book, and get out of the business of fining people for stupid crap like not talking to the media, wearing the wrong color cleats, or what headphones they wear pregame.

Are you familiar with PSI? Did you know that officials test balls inside?

11 of 12 underinflated? Well did you know that the Pats don't have to inflate each ball the same way? They just fall into a range, so one or two or three or however many could be different by as much as what the range allows?

If lower PSI is such an advantage, how come the NFL doesn't force teams to overinflate while indoors during really cold games because the PSI can drop significantly after 30 minutes of being outdoors?

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 11:11 AM

If a pitcher is getting rocked and all of a sudden an emory board is found in his glove. Do the umpires just say "oh never mind, we are not going to eject you because your doing lousy anyway"??

The Pats would of likely beat the Colts 9 times out of 10 if they played them. The Pats were better and they have our number.

The thing about the 2nd half that people are bringing up about the Pats playing better with the properly inflated balls is maybe the Colts just really sucked the 2nd half or the Pats played even better with the proper football. Maybe they would have really drubbed the Colts even more in the 2nd half if they had the deflated football.

The bottom line is they should have just played by the rules and we never would have these "what if" questions.

We're all assuming that the low range for PSI is set to avoid competitive advantage.

If a lower range PSI gives a team a competitive advantage, why does the NFL allow a range?

And why do they test them indoors where the PSI will measure higher if it's warmer inside than out?

RedsBaron

01-24-2015, 11:26 AM

Ever since that blatant advantage I disdain the Pats. Anymore I hate them more than I do the Steelers and the Cowboys.

Whoa! Hate the Patriots more than the Steelers? That's going too far! ;)

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 11:39 AM

I'm starting to wonder what Aaron Rodgers is up to. If he's willing to cheat with this rule, what else is up to? And notice what he says here (or what Phil Simms says Rodgers told him):

(Rodgers) said something [that] was unique," Simms said. "[Rodgers said] 'I like to push the limit to how much air we can put in the football, even go over what they allow you to do and see if the officials take air out of it.' Because he thinks it's easier for him to grip. He likes them tight."

So Rodgers overinflates the ball, and instead of losing draft picks and calls of cheating, the officials just let the air out of them.

This is preference, not cheating. Teams are allowed to rub dirt on the ball...they alter them.

George Anderson

01-24-2015, 11:48 AM

I'm starting to wonder what Aaron Rodgers is up to. If he's willing to cheat with this rule, what else is up to? And notice what he says here (or what Phil Simms says Rodgers told him):

So Rodgers overinflates the ball, and instead of losing draft picks and calls of cheating, the officials just let the air out of them.

This is preference, not cheating. Teams are allowed to rub dirt on the ball...they alter them.

If Rodgers or the GB ball boy or whoever went back after the officials tested the ball and added air then yes this would be cheating along the lines of what the Pats allegedly have done. While I don't condone what Rodgers says he has done, it still is not as bad as what the Pats have allegedly done.

Are you a Pats fan btw?

Slyder

01-24-2015, 11:50 AM

I'm starting to wonder what Aaron Rodgers is up to. If he's willing to cheat with this rule, what else is up to? And notice what he says here (or what Phil Simms says Rodgers told him):

So Rodgers overinflates the ball, and instead of losing draft picks and calls of cheating, the officials just let the air out of them.

This is preference, not cheating. Teams are allowed to rub dirt on the ball...they alter them.

Thats second hand story.

http://www.nj.com/super-bowl/index.ssf/2015/01/deflate-gate_green_bay_packers_quarterback_aaron_rodgers_l ikes_his_footballs_overinflated.html

"I always like to be on the high range because of my grip pressure. I just have a hard time throwing a flat football. The majority of the quarterbacks — I would say more than half — are on the other side of the spectrum and like it on the flatter side."

"My belief is that there should be a minimum air pressure requirement, but not a maximum."

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 12:03 PM

If Rodgers or the GB ball boy or whoever went back after the officials tested the ball and added air then yes this would be cheating along the lines of what the Pats allegedly have done. While I don't condone what Rodgers says he has done, it still is not as bad as what the Pats have allegedly done.

Are you a Pats fan btw?

After I defend you when you're from Indy you ask me if I'm a Pats fan?

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 12:06 PM

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 12:09 PM

Thats second hand story.

http://www.nj.com/super-bowl/index.ssf/2015/01/deflate-gate_green_bay_packers_quarterback_aaron_rodgers_l ikes_his_footballs_overinflated.html

"I always like to be on the high range because of my grip pressure. I just have a hard time throwing a flat football. The majority of the quarterbacks — I would say more than half — are on the other side of the spectrum and like it on the flatter side."

"My belief is that there should be a minimum air pressure requirement, but not a maximum."

I don't think Phil Simms is lying and the only way the refs are taking air out of the balls is if someone put too much in there to begin with.

Assembly Hall

01-24-2015, 12:13 PM

Whoa! Hate the Patriots more than the Steelers? That's going too far! ;)

LOL.......it goes back to my childhood. I got sick of seeing Pittsburgh in the Super Bowl dang near every year.

Assembly Hall

01-24-2015, 12:18 PM

Dom, they just cheated. They have cheated in the past, they are cheating right now, and they will continue to cheat in the future.

George Anderson

01-24-2015, 12:20 PM

After I defend you when you're from Indy you ask me if I'm a Pats fan?

It was not meant as anything personal. It is seriously a simple question I am curious about.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 12:20 PM

Dom, they just cheated. They have cheated in the past, they are cheating right now, and they will continue to cheat in the future.

So If Aaron Rodgers overinflates footballs he was always a cheater, is a cheater and will be a cheater?

Assembly Hall

01-24-2015, 12:29 PM

So If Aaron Rodgers overinflates footballs he was always a cheater, is a cheater and will be a cheater?

Listen man, the Pats have a history of cheating. It is just not relegated to the air pressure in a football.

Slyder

01-24-2015, 12:48 PM

I don't think Phil Simms is lying and the only way the refs are taking air out of the balls is if someone put too much in there to begin with.

Phil Simms is a member of the media, they need stories to help fill the 70% of the time that play is not going on.

Plus you don't hear of the Pack putting air back in them during the game... Here's another Rodgers quote:

http://abc7chicago.com/sports/aaron-rodgers-fully-inflate-footballs/483564/

"I have a major problem with the way it goes down, to be honest with you," Rodgers said Tuesday on his ESPN Milwaukee radio show. "The majority of the time, they take air out of the football. I think that, for me, is a disadvantage."

"There is, if you don't have strong grip pressure or smaller hands, an advantage to having a flat football, though, because that is easier to throw. So I think that is something they need to look at. There should be a minimum on the air pressure but not a maximum. Every game they're taking air out of the footballs I'm throwing, and I think that's a disadvantage for the way that I like them prepped."

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 12:54 PM

Listen man, the Pats have a history of cheating. It is just not relegated to the air pressure in a football.

Yes. My point. Thank you. So you're saying that because of a past incident, you'd be more inclined to believe something without any evidence, such as the Ravens did when they told the NFL they believed the Patriots gave them underinflated balls for their kicking game.

Their kicking game didn't have the same amount of lift, they claimed.

Let's set aside for the moment that the Pats have nothing to do with balls used in the kicking game. The officials control that. As well, the visiting teams use their own balls whenever they have the ball. They each share the same 8 balls when it comes to kicking.

Setting that aside, the Ravens averaged higher distances in that game then they did for the year.

But the Pats cheated before so the Ravens must be right.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 12:58 PM

The Ravens also thought the Pats were cheating with the substitution thing. They weren't. But because they cheated before, maybe they did, I don't know.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 01:02 PM

Phil Simms is a member of the media, they need stories to help fill the 70% of the time that play is not going on.

Plus you don't hear of the Pack putting air back in them during the game... Here's another Rodgers quote:

http://abc7chicago.com/sports/aaron-rodgers-fully-inflate-footballs/483564/

"I have a major problem with the way it goes down, to be honest with you," Rodgers said Tuesday on his ESPN Milwaukee radio show. "The majority of the time, they take air out of the football. I think that, for me, is a disadvantage."

"There is, if you don't have strong grip pressure or smaller hands, an advantage to having a flat football, though, because that is easier to throw. So I think that is something they need to look at. There should be a minimum on the air pressure but not a maximum. Every game they're taking air out of the footballs I'm throwing, and I think that's a disadvantage for the way that I like them prepped."

Since the balls are measured by officials before the game that would be an odd thing to overinflate them and hope they don't notice during the measurement process wouldn 't it?

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 01:06 PM

According to La Canfora's report, Ravens sources said the Ravens were not getting normal depth and distance on kicks and punts and believed it was due to deflated balls. At least statistically, that claim doesn't add up either. Baltimore punter Sam Koch punted four times and averaged 50.3 yards per punt -- above his season average of 47.4 yards per punt. Justin Tucker only attempted one field goal, a 25-yard attempt. He did, however, kick off six times. According to The Football Database, Tucker averaged 64.8 yards per kickoff this season. On his six kickoffs against New England, he averaged 66.2 yards per kickoff. If the Ravens were kicking with deflated balls, they did one hell of a job.

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/1/21/7864957/patriots-deflated-kicking-balls-ravens-colts

Sore. Losers.

As well- a deflated ball would help on a 25 yard attempt. They don't seem to advocate the removal of their 3 points.

traderumor

01-24-2015, 02:09 PM

Yes, and I was pointing out that Traderumor doesn't have evidence of anything else, thus "What else are they up to" is slippery slope reasoning.Maybe you need to look at several web pages to get a more rounded understanding of "slippery slope argumentation." Try googling "opening up a can of worms." I did not say "they must be up to something else because they....." That would be slippery slope. Not what I said. I said it should lead to more investigating. In auditing parlance, we call it "the tone at the top," and leadership that lacks overall integrity leads auditors to do more testing and rely less on internal controls, for example. I would say its safe to say "NE leadership lacks integrity" at this point. That's really got nothing to do with "slippery slope argumentation," which as you did here, is often used as a trump card if anyone mentions "A may lead to B."

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 02:15 PM

The only thing that should lead to more investigating is the arrival of new evidence.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 02:16 PM

Maybe you need to look at several web pages to get a more rounded understanding of "slippery slope argumentation." Try googling "opening up a can of worms." I did not say "they must be up to something else because they....." That would be slippery slope. Not what I said. I said it should lead to more investigating. In auditing parlance, we call it "the tone at the top," and leadership that lacks overall integrity leads auditors to do more testing and rely less on internal controls, for example. I would say its safe to say "NE leadership lacks integrity" at this point. That's really got nothing to do with "slippery slope argumentation," which as you did here, is often used as a trump card if anyone mentions "A may lead to B."

Your DUI- did it lead to a search of your home? What other law were you nreaking since you broke at least 2 others?

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 02:17 PM

Since the Ravens have now made phoney accusations, any accusations going forward should be ignored. They've done it twice now.

Revering4Blue

01-24-2015, 02:57 PM

Switching away from the Inflategate topic for a minute:

God bless Mike Lupica...To my knowledge, he's the only member of the National media to quash the ridiculous narrative that Manning has always had skill position weapons around him and Brady hasn't.

Over the years, Brady has had Dillon, Gronk and Welker, to name a few. This Blount fella is pretty good and so was Hernandez -- before he ran afoul of the law, of course. Oh, and he also had Randy Moss.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 03:08 PM

Revering4Blue

01-24-2015, 03:16 PM

Not sure how Dillon counts. He caught about a ball a game.

I'd say Manning has had better receivers than Brady has had.

Dillion as a running back took the pressure off of Brady. That's what I meant. As for the second point, even if true -- and it may be if you count Manning's time in Denver -- the gap in talent isn't as large as most suggest. It isn't as if Brady hasn't had plenty of weapons at his disposal, not to mention a better offensive line at times.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 03:24 PM

Here's Manning's top 25: the numbers go from R to L: draft pick#, year, number of receptions.

Marvin Harrison 19 1996 961
Reggie Wayne 30 2001 856
Dallas Clark 24 2003 387
Edgerrin James 4 1999 358
Marcus Pollard UDFA 1995 241
Demaryius Thomas 22 2010 231
Brandon Stokely 105 1999 180
Joseph Addai 30 2006 178
Eric Decker 87 2010 172
Ken Dilger 48 1995 150
Jacob Tamme 127 2008 144
Jerome Pathon 32 1998 138
Dominic Rhodes UDFA 2001 126
Terrence Wilkins UDFA 1999 117
Pierre Garcon 205 2008 116
Austin Collie 127 2009 114
Anthony Gonzalez 32 2007 100
Wes Welker UDFA 2004 92
Julius Thomas 129 2011 90
Knowshon Moreno 12 2009 89
Marshall Faulk 2 1994 86
Ben Utecht UDFA 2004 69
Troy Walters 165 2000 56
E.G. Green 71 1998 54
Bryan Fletcher 210 2002 51

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 03:25 PM

traderumor

01-24-2015, 03:35 PM

Your DUI- did it lead to a search of your home? What other law were you nreaking since you broke at least 2 others?No, but when they pulled me over for speeding, they suspected that I might be impaired, so they gave me a road sobriety test. They also searched me, another slippery slope violation. They also would have run my plates to see if I had anything going on. They slippery sloped me right into the patrol car. By the logic you are trying to use here, they should only have looked at the speeding and considered nothing else because they didn't want to "use slippery slope argumentation." They couldn't even run my plates, right? I think your version of "slippery slope argumentation" is violated quite frequently in law enforcement. They call it "probable cause" in their profession. But then your version is misapplying the principle.

What you have demonstrated is an ever increasing problem in places like this of folks misapplying logical fallacy principles.

Revering4Blue

01-24-2015, 03:49 PM

Here's Brady's:

Wes Welker UDFA 2004 551
Troy Brown 198 1993 332
Deion Branch 65 2002 328
Kevin Faulk 46 1999 310
Rob Gronkowski 42 2010 266
David Givens 253 2002 249
Julian Edelman 232 2009 215
Randy Moss 21 1998 190
Aaron Hernandez 113 2010 177
David Patten UDFA 1996 157
Ben Watson 32 2004 145
Daniel Graham 21 2002 120
Danny Woodhead UDFA 2008 92
Shane Vereen 56 2011 81
Christian Fauria 39 1995 79
Brandon Lloyd 124 2003 74
Danny Amendola UDFA 2008 64
Antowain Smith 23 1997 64
Patrick Pass 239 2000 62
Reche Caldwell 48 2002 61
Corey Dillon 43 1997 52
Sammy Morris 156 2000 49
Jabar Gaffney 33 2002 47
Donte Stallworth 13 2002 47

- - - Updated - - -

Manning wins that, I think.

Counting his time in Denver, yes. I already conceded that. But it's not as if Brady has been throwing to a bunch of scrubs. Brown and Branch, in particular, even though neither was what you'd call a game-breaker, were both seriously underrated, as was Kevin Faulk, one of the best third down backs in recent history.

This list does point the only -- and I do mean only -- flaw with Belichick from the administrative standpoint: He's drafted several WRs with high picks that haven't panned out.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 04:05 PM

No, but when they pulled me over for speeding, they suspected that I might be impaired, so they gave me a road sobriety test. They also searched me, another slippery slope violation. They also would have run my plates to see if I had anything going on. They slippery sloped me right into the patrol car. By the logic you are trying to use here, they should only have looked at the speeding and considered nothing else because they didn't want to "use slippery slope argumentation." They couldn't even run my plates, right? I think your version of "slippery slope argumentation" is violated quite frequently in law enforcement. They call it "probable cause" in their profession. But then your version is misapplying the principle.

What you have demonstrated is an ever increasing problem in places like this of folks misapplying logical fallacy principles.

This is a mess.

No, speeding is not probable cause for DUI.

Probable cause is necessary before the police can begin a DUI investigation. Speeding is not very likely to be that.

You're proving me right here.

Speeding was why you were pulled over. Just because you were speeding is not reason to start a DUI investigation.

The police can 't say well he was speeding so let's check for DUI. So you did something else or you should have gotten a better attorney.

That's why my point is important. We don't open up other investigations just because we have one.

I don't care if it's a slippery slope or another logical fallacy to say "What else are they doing" just because someone cheats in one area does not mean they 'll cheat in others.

The NFL isn't law enforcement they can do what they want, but your reasing is specious.

You've been wrong before, maybe you're wrong now. See how that works?

traderumor

01-24-2015, 04:23 PM

This is a mess.

No, speeding is not probable cause for DUI.

Probable cause is necessary before the police can begin a DUI investigation. Speeding is not very likely to be that.

You're proving me right here.

Speeding was why you were pulled over. Just because you were speeding is not reason to start a DUI investigation.

The police can 't say well he was speeding so let's check for DUI. So you did something else or you should have gotten a better attorney.

That's why my point is important. We don't open up other investigations just because we have one.

I don't care if it's a slippery slope or another logical fallacy to say "What else are they doing" just because someone cheats in one area does not mean they 'll cheat in others.

The NFL isn't law enforcement they can do what they want, but your reasing is specious.

You've been wrong before, maybe you're wrong now. See how that works?Dom, give it a rest as will I. I wasn't asking you to analyze my DUI case from 25 years ago nor did I provide every fact of what happened that night because it wasn't necessary for the point I was making. Please move on, you've made your point, I made mine.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 04:36 PM

Dom, give it a rest as will I. I wasn't asking you to analyze my DUI case from 25 years ago nor did I provide every fact of what happened that night because it wasn't necessary for the point I was making. Please move on, you've made your point, I made mine.

Fair enough.

757690

01-24-2015, 05:08 PM

Belichek holds surprise press confrence. Says he did his own tests on footballs. This is getting very sad and pathetic.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-belichick-everything-we-did-was-right-all-footballs-are-different/

blumj

01-24-2015, 06:36 PM

"We took 12 brand new authentic NFL footballs and exposed them to the different elements they would have experienced throughout the game." said Thomas Healy, founder of HeadSmart Labs. "Out of the twelve footballs we tested, we found that on average, footballs dropped 1.8 PSI when exposed to dropping temperatures and wet conditions."

https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/131228/d8f159cc-99db-47be-b8d1-1828d64dde17/HeadSmartLabs_The_Science_Behind_DeflateGate.pdf

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 06:49 PM

https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/131228/d8f159cc-99db-47be-b8d1-1828d64dde17/HeadSmartLabs_The_Science_Behind_DeflateGate.pdf

I can't get that to load.

The Science Behind “Deflate-Gate”

The Pressure In AFC Championship Footballs Could Have Changed By 1.95 PSI From
Weather and Field Conditions

Pittsburgh, PA (January 23, 2015) -- HeadSmart™Labs, a Healy Ventures LLC company, today
announced findings from a study on football inflation levels in different climates. The study indicated
that the pressure in the footballs used in the AFC Championship game could have dropped 1.95 PSI
from weather and field conditions alone.

HeadSmart Labs set out to discover if weather during the AFC Championship Game on Sunday,
January 18 could have affected the inflation levels in the footballs. The Lab designed a study that would
simulate the external elements the game footballs were exposed to. The study encompasses the
timeframe from when referees would have initially tested the footballs prior to the start of the game, to
the time when the footballs were found to have a lower air pressure during halftime. Reports state that
when the game officials tested the New England Patriots’ footballs during halftime, 11 of the 12 were
found to have lost pressure of about 2 PSI.

“We took 12 brand new authentic NFL footballs and exposed them to the different elements they would
have experienced throughout the game.” said Thomas Healy, founder of HeadSmart Labs. “Out of the
twelve footballs we tested, we found that on average, footballs dropped 1.8 PSI when being exposed to
dropping temperatures and wet conditions.”

During testing, twelve brand new footballs were inflated to 12.5 PSI in a 75 degree Fahrenheit room.
This was to imitate the indoor conditions where the referees would have tested the footballs 2 hours
and 15 minutes before kickoff. The footballs were then moved to a 50 degree Fahrenheit environment
to simulate the temperatures that were experienced throughout the game. In addition, the footballs
were dampened to replicate the rainy conditions.

Assembly Hall

01-24-2015, 06:52 PM

This is a mess.

No, speeding is not probable cause for DUI.

Probable cause is necessary before the police can begin a DUI investigation. Speeding is not very likely to be that.

You're proving me right here.

Speeding was why you were pulled over. Just because you were speeding is not reason to start a DUI investigation.

The police can 't say well he was speeding so let's check for DUI. So you did something else or you should have gotten a better attorney.

That's why my point is important. We don't open up other investigations just because we have one.

I don't care if it's a slippery slope or another logical fallacy to say "What else are they doing" just because someone cheats in one area does not mean they 'll cheat in others.

The NFL isn't law enforcement they can do what they want, but your reasing is specious.

You've been wrong before, maybe you're wrong now. See how that works?

Dom, you got me scratching my head. To be honest, I am so dizzy my head is spinning. Probable cause, is just that...probable cause. You get pulled over for speeding or what ever, the law will pursue to their fullest extent.......period. Say tr's dui arrest also led to the police finding marijuana in his vehicle.......do you not think that the police will keep an eye on his house? In this case talking about the NFL, the Patriots have been caught cheating before. I would say it is safe to assume that they are under the league's microscope. But hey, I have been wrong before.......just ask my 3 ex-wives!!!!!!!!

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 07:05 PM

Dom, you got me scratching my head. To be honest, I am so dizzy my head is spinning. Probable cause, is just that...probable cause. You get pulled over for speeding or what ever, the law will pursue to their fullest extent.......period. Say tr's dui arrest also led to the police finding marijuana in his vehicle.......do you not think that the police will keep an eye on his house? In this case talking about the NFL, the Patriots have been caught cheating before. I would say it is safe to assume that they are under the league's microscope. But hey, I have been wrong before.......just ask my 3 ex-wives!!!!!!!!

let's speak hypothetically, I don't want to speak about anyone on the forum.

The police require probable cause for any investigation.

Speeding would not be probable cause to force a breathalyzer test.

They can't pull you over for speeding and then search your car, or do anything else to you without probable cause.

Swerving, going too slow, crossing lanes, driving reckelssly, fumbling your wallet, slurring your speech...all probable cause. Speeding, not so much.

We don't say gosh you were speeding, what else are you doing and then off we go...

I'm not going to talk about it anymore...at least with this analogy.

Donder

01-24-2015, 07:07 PM

And then there's this study about how statistically improbable it is for the Patriots to fumble as little as they do.
http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2015/01/23/deflated-patriots-statistically-impossible-fumble-record/#.VML8JdJiFWM.facebook

But it gets worse for Brady and the Patriots. Sharp Football Analysis was able to trace the emergence of this phenomena to a bright-line date: 2007. Starting in 2007, the Patriots suddenly began to hold onto the football at a statistical rate likely to occur 1 time in 16,233. A rational person might conclude this is the moment when someone on the Patriots cooked up the scheme to illegally deflate the ball

One thing for sure, everyone it coming out of the woodwork to weigh in on this. And somehow I don't feel bad that the Patriots need to deal with this distraction.

Red Raindog

01-24-2015, 07:10 PM

I can't get that to load.

I can't wait to see the science that explains why this only happened to the Pats' footballs

Donder

01-24-2015, 07:12 PM

https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/131228/d8f159cc-99db-47be-b8d1-1828d64dde17/HeadSmartLabs_The_Science_Behind_DeflateGate.pdf

And yet

All of the balls the Colts used met standards, according to the report.
http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/12202450/nfl-says-new-england-patriots-had-inflated-footballs-afc-championship-game

George Anderson

01-24-2015, 07:19 PM

I can't wait to see the science that explains why this only happened to the Pats' footballs

Its um because we are um jealous and um haters that are hating. Integrity and playing by the rules do not matter.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 07:23 PM

I can't wait to see the science that explains why this only happened to the Pats' footballs

You don't know where they started and where they ended up and you don't when they were measured.

But keep talking like you do, it will make you look sillier if anything else comes out.

- - - Updated - - -

And then there's this study about how statistically improbable it is for the Patriots to fumble as little as they do.
http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2015/01/23/deflated-patriots-statistically-impossible-fumble-record/#.VML8JdJiFWM.facebook

One thing for sure, everyone it coming out of the woodwork to weigh in on this. And somehow I don't feel bad that the Patriots need to deal with this distraction.

They only led the league once during this period.

Were the other teams cheating?

Donder

01-24-2015, 07:56 PM

They only led the league once during this period.

Were the other teams cheating?

Twice, actually. 2007 and 2010. Unless you're looking at fumbles lost instead of overall fumbles. Also they have been in the top five every year except 2013.

But beyond that, are you saying this chart doesn't look suspicious to you at all?
8508

It doesn't prove anything, but its in the very least interesting and relevant to this conversation.

Red Raindog

01-24-2015, 07:59 PM

You don't know where they started and where they ended up and you don't when they were measured.

But keep talking like you do, it will make you look sillier if anything else comes out.

- - - Updated - - -

They only led the league once during this period.

Were the other teams cheating?

Sillier?
I will take that chance in this case.

Red Raindog

01-24-2015, 08:04 PM

Twice, actually. 2007 and 2010. Unless you're looking at fumbles lost instead of overall fumbles. Also they have been in the top five every year except 2013.

But beyond that, are you saying this chart doesn't look suspicious to you at all?
8508

It doesn't prove anything, but its in the very least interesting and relevant to this conversation.

Not to one member here but I say that at the risk of looking sillier
😈

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 08:14 PM

Twice, actually. 2007 and 2010. Unless you're looking at fumbles lost instead of overall fumbles. Also they have been in the top five every year except 2013.

But beyond that, are you saying this chart doesn't look suspicious to you at all?
8508

It doesn't prove anything, but its in the very least interesting and relevant to this conversation.

No- it doesn't.

They don't tolerate fumblers.

This is reaching stupid proportions now.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 08:20 PM

Someone take a look at the Falcons and Colts!

8509

Donder

01-24-2015, 08:24 PM

No- it doesn't.

They don't tolerate fumblers.

This is reaching stupid proportions now.

Between 2001-2006, Tom Brady averaged 2.7 fumbles per season.

Then Belichick said "I shall no longer tolerate fumbles!"

From 2007-2014 he averaged 1.3 fumbles per season.

Belichick is a genius!

Donder

01-24-2015, 08:28 PM

Someone take a look at the Falcons and Colts!

8509

I hope they take a look at all teams and most of all their (the NFL's) policies.

By the way, in my opinion your graph does your argument more harm than good. It shows how incredibly rare it is for outdoor teams to fumble so little. Again the Patriots defy the odds.

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 08:41 PM

They are cheating...it must be .

Why, the Ravens said the Patriots fixed their kicking footballs.

traderumor

01-24-2015, 08:44 PM

They are cheating...it must be .They aren't cheating...it can't be

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 08:51 PM

They aren't cheating...it can't be

Do you see any problems with the analysis?

Dom Heffner

01-24-2015, 08:59 PM

The thing that sticks out to me is that you can't fumble an incomplete pass.

So fumbles per play...not sure that tells us much.

Probably better to do receptions plus rushing attempts with total fumbles as the numerator.

When you do it that way....the Ravens are numero uno.

Are they deflating balls? Is this statistically impossible? Should we call the NFL?

Ravens
Patriots
Saints
Falcons
Packers

Only one outdoor team there. Wow.

I guess that isn't totally foolproof as the QB can fumble on a dropback...if that's how they score it. Not sure if that is a rush attempt or what it is.

I dunno, this is silly.

Thanks to a commentor on this article for the data above.

bigredmechanism

01-24-2015, 09:27 PM

I hope they take a look at all teams and most of all their (the NFL's) policies.

By the way, in my opinion your graph does your argument more harm than good. It shows how incredibly rare it is for outdoor teams to fumble so little. Again the Patriots defy the odds.

Well, keep in mind Green-Ellis was their Rb for a good part of this time, and he is known for ball security as a RB. Of course their numbers will look better when their RB is known as a guy who doesn't fumble often.

Slyder

01-24-2015, 10:26 PM

https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/131228/d8f159cc-99db-47be-b8d1-1828d64dde17/HeadSmartLabs_The_Science_Behind_DeflateGate.pdf

Then how come when weighed Indys balls were reported as being "legal"?

bigredmechanism

01-24-2015, 10:46 PM

Then how come when weighed Indys balls were reported as being "legal"?

Maybe Indy's balls were at the upper limit, and the decrease in temp brought them lower but still within the legal range?

Do we know what PSI indy's balls were recorded at?

WrongVerb

01-24-2015, 10:47 PM

Whoa! Hate the Patriots more than the Steelers? That's going too far! ;)

I've got to admit that the last time I watched the Steelers and Patriots play this long time Bengals fan found myself on the side of black and gold.

757690

01-24-2015, 11:14 PM

Maybe Indy's balls were at the upper limit, and the decrease in temp brought them lower but still within the legal range?

Do we know what PSI indy's balls were recorded at?

The Pats footballs were recorded midgame at less than 10.5 PSI, which means they lost at least 2 PSI from the time they were checked before the game, and the time they were checked midgame. If the Colts footballs experienced the same drop naturally, and were at the top limit of 13.5 PSI at the start of the game, then they would not still be within the legal limit of 12.5-13.5 PSI.

blumj

01-25-2015, 06:26 AM

Jim Irsay seems to be enjoying this an awful lot, maybe someone should ask him why his team's footballs seem to have defied science?

bigredmechanism

01-25-2015, 06:41 AM

The Pats footballs were recorded midgame at less than 10.5 PSI, which means they lost at least 2 PSI from the time they were checked before the game, and the time they were checked midgame. If the Colts footballs experienced the same drop naturally, and were at the top limit of 13.5 PSI at the start of the game, then they would not still be within the legal limit of 12.5-13.5 PSI.

Maybe the Colts balls were above the 13.5 threshold before the game?

If casual fans are going to take this as seriously as people suddenly have the past week, maybe refs need to keep an official log of the PSI of each ball tested so they will have a source at least when saying random numbers.

blumj

01-25-2015, 07:25 AM

Maybe the Colts balls were above the 13.5 threshold before the game?

If casual fans are going to take this as seriously as people suddenly have the past week, maybe refs need to keep an official log of the PSI of each ball tested so they will have a source at least when saying random numbers.
Or, maybe the Colts don't do any of their ball prep on game day and/or their balls were colder when they gave them to the refs. But, yeah, if they really want to start taking this seriously, establish how they want teams and refs to do this in a way that takes at least an elementary school level of scientific understanding into account. Like, no roughing up the balls and keep them in a particular environment for a specified amount of time before they're handed over to the refs would likely be the 2 simplest rules in their whole rule book and the air pressure of the footballs is so important that this never even came up before?

RedsBaron

01-25-2015, 08:32 AM

Phil Simms is a member of the media, they need stories to help fill the 70% of the time that play is not going on.

Plus you don't hear of the Pack putting air back in them during the game... Here's another Rodgers quote:

http://abc7chicago.com/sports/aaron-rodgers-fully-inflate-footballs/483564/

"I have a major problem with the way it goes down, to be honest with you," Rodgers said Tuesday on his ESPN Milwaukee radio show. "The majority of the time, they take air out of the football. I think that, for me, is a disadvantage."

"There is, if you don't have strong grip pressure or smaller hands, an advantage to having a flat football, though, because that is easier to throw. So I think that is something they need to look at. There should be a minimum on the air pressure but not a maximum. Every game they're taking air out of the footballs I'm throwing, and I think that's a disadvantage for the way that I like them prepped."

I have long thought that Aaron Rodgers throws the "prettiest" passes I have ever seen. That doesn't necessarily make him the best quarterback. Payton Manning has had a great career but even in his physical prime I never thought Payton threw a pretty ball, as a lot of his passes looked like ducks-expertly thrown, on time and accurately delivered ducks, but ducks. Rodgers consistently throws tight spirals. Rodgers comments about preferring an over inflated ball and having big hands and strong grip pressure perhaps explain why.

Dom Heffner

01-25-2015, 09:21 AM

George Anderson

01-25-2015, 11:26 AM

bigredmechanism

01-25-2015, 12:36 PM

If people want the balls to be whatever the QB wants then just eliminate the rule.

I'm not saying get rid of the rule, I'm just pointing out that people need to realize that testing a football's pressure in a controlled environment vs hours later when it's been played with in the cold and rain will yield different results with no foul play involved. That it is the patriots and Belichick leads a lot of people to assume its cheating off the bat, without thinking about the fact that thermodynamics exists.

Dom Heffner

01-25-2015, 01:01 PM

If people want the balls to be whatever the QB wants then just eliminate the rule.

Good point, but calls of cheating, taking away draft picks or fining a team for something that can happen naturally seems silly.

757690

01-25-2015, 01:09 PM

George Anderson

01-25-2015, 01:23 PM

I'm not saying get rid of the rule, I'm just pointing out that people need to realize that testing a football's pressure in a controlled environment vs hours later when it's been played with in the cold and rain will yield different results with no foul play involved. That it is the patriots and Belichick leads a lot of people to assume its cheating off the bat, without thinking about the fact that thermodynamics exists.

Sorry but Belichick or the Pats are not going to get the benefit of doubt from me. 11 of the 12 footballs were deflated but we are supposed to believe poor innocent Bill and Tom knew nothing about it.i kinda compare Belichick to the Al Capone of football. It would be like the police found a dead body in Capones apartment but poor Al knew nothing about it or had anything to do with it. Bottom line is Bill like Al is dirty and gets no benefit of doubt from me or many others.

757690

01-25-2015, 01:39 PM

Belicheck's "science" isn't holding up, according to actual scientists. Here are two responses to his claims:

Bill glosses over that the ideal gas law also applies to the atmosphere the ball is in. That is to say, as It heats or cools it's density also changes and thus the pressure it exerts back on the balls exterior changes too. For what Bill has said to be 'plausible' they would have had to fill the balls to 11.5 (or whatever) with hot air in a cold room. You then let the ball sit and as the gas comes to temperature inside the football, the pressure will indeed be lower. But that's the catch: You need some way to be inflating the balls with significantly hotter air than the ambient temperature in the room in which they are being inflated (and measured) for this sort of scenario to happen. If you do this with hot air in a hot room, the atmospheric pressure will be less in the room, so more air will need to go in the ball. If you then let that cool down in a cold room.... the pressure won't go down. Certainly not by 2 psi. The biggest problem here is that if only 11 of 12 were under-inflated.. Why didn't the final one (or the Colts balls) obey the laws of physics according to Bill?

Guy-Lassac's Law regarding the relationship between pressure and temperature: P1/T1=P2/T2. (Temperature must be measured in absolute temperatures, meaning it has to be on a scale from absolute zero.) By this equation, a ball inflated to 12.5 psi at a room temperature of 70 would only fall to 12.0 psi at 50. A 30 degree drop would result in a fall in pressure to 11.8 psi. It's been widely reported that the pressure actually fell two pounds per square inch, to around 10.5 psi. That kind of fall in pressure would require temperatures to fall by 84 degrees. They would have had to have played that game at 14 below zero. You can do these calculations yourself ... just be sure to convert all the temperatures to kelvin. I would love the Boston physicist to show his work.

They also say that deflating the footballs give a team a significant advantage:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/01/20/378581349/scientists-say-the-nfls-deflate-gate-isnt-all-hot-air

Deflating the ball does give a team an advantage," says materials scientist Ainissa Ramirez, the author of Newton's Football, a book about the science of football. Ramirez says the slightly softer football improves the grip. Particularly during that game which was very rainy, it's hard to hold the ball, it's hard to catch the ball," she says. "So by making it a little softer, it's easier to catch the ball.

Dom Heffner

01-25-2015, 02:02 PM

Belicheck's "science" isn't holding up, according to actual scientists. Here are two responses to his claims:

They also say that deflating the footballs give a team a significant advantage:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/01/20/378581349/scientists-say-the-nfls-deflate-gate-isnt-all-hot-air

There are others claiming differently, we'll see.

757690

01-25-2015, 02:20 PM

There are others claiming differently, we'll see.

You are correct that there are many different opinions about this floated out there. Like Belicheck, I am not a scientist, and I don't understand much of this, so I honestly don't know what to believe at this point. I will say that you put up an impressive argument. This has been a very informative and entertaining thread for me.

Chip R

01-25-2015, 06:12 PM

http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/report_nfl_tried_to_catch_patriots_in_the_act_with _deflategate/18151448

Assembly Hall

01-25-2015, 06:38 PM

There are others claiming differently, we'll see.

Well hopefully Seattle can get this science figured out for us.

bigredmechanism

01-26-2015, 12:16 AM

But what has the NFL really found? As one league source has explained it to PFT, the football intercepted by Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson was roughly two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum. The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

It seems like there has been a lot of misinformation with this story.

Kingspoint

01-26-2015, 02:37 AM

The meanest, nastiest team is going to win the Super Bowl every time, regardless of what air pressure is in any of the footballs.

Do they have a measuring instrument for that?

blumj

01-26-2015, 07:16 AM

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

It seems like there has been a lot of misinformation with this story.
Here's what we probably can assume we know for certain(even have to qualify that a bit): there's an ongoing investigation, the Pats footballs tested below the PSI limit at halftime of a game played in cold, rainy weather. What we probably shouldn't assume we know for certain, to this point: everything else.

The media, not just the sports media but news media, too, turned this into WW III with almost no solid information except that there's an ongoing investigation, and the NFL allowed them to do this by not providing any solid information except that there's an ongoing investigation.

Be careful what and who you believe about absolutely everything.

traderumor

01-26-2015, 10:20 AM

Here's what we probably can assume we know for certain(even have to qualify that a bit): there's an ongoing investigation, the Pats footballs tested below the PSI limit at halftime of a game played in cold, rainy weather. What we probably shouldn't assume we know for certain, to this point: everything else.

The media, not just the sports media but news media, too, turned this into WW III with almost no solid information except that there's an ongoing investigation, and the NFL allowed them to do this by not providing any solid information except that there's an ongoing investigation.

Be careful what and who you believe about absolutely everything.
They don't care about accuracy. You are talking about it. Mission accomplished.

757690

01-26-2015, 01:04 PM

Caveat Emperor

01-26-2015, 01:05 PM

Between 2001-2006, Tom Brady averaged 2.7 fumbles per season.

Then Belichick said "I shall no longer tolerate fumbles!"

From 2007-2014 he averaged 1.3 fumbles per season.

Belichick is a genius!

...or, Tom Brady got better at protecting the football as he matured from young kid to established pocket passer.

I mean, this is getting silly.

Caveat Emperor

01-26-2015, 01:06 PM

It's a big deal because the Pats were caught cheating before, and cheating is a BFD, especially in a Championship game that gets a team to the Super Bowl. Look at the regular news. They are all over it too. It's huge on CNN.

It's huge because there is always some huge storyline going into the Super Bowl. It's deflated footballs this year. It was illegal deer antler spray a few years ago. There's always something.

The NFL is really good at getting people to pay attention to the NFL when they put their minds to it.

SultanOfSwing

01-26-2015, 02:17 PM

It's a big deal because the Pats were caught cheating before, and cheating is a BFD, especially in a Championship game that gets a team to the Super Bowl.

When have they been caught cheating before?

Look at the regular news. They are all over it too. It's huge on CNN.

Sensation rules the day (or more accurately, the minute and second). Its all about clicks, views, and money. That is the unfortunate state of "news and reporting" today, especially in this country. It seems true journalism and objective research are rapidly disappearing. Don't worry about being right, just be the first to spout innuendo or conjecture. If it does end up being even partially true, you are genius. If not, apparently there are few consequences, likely because the remaining media is doing the same.

What fascinates me the most, regardless or whether New England violated an NFL rule or not or whether they will be punished or not, is the complete uproar and sensation around perhaps one, maybe two, facts and a whole ton of conjecture and rumor. The only thing we actually seem to know is that the NFL is investigating whether the Patriots used deflated footballs during the first quarter of the AFCCG. How much they may have been deflated and whether the Patriots had any fault in it is purely unknown.

However, rather than wait for facts and the completion of an investigation (that may be trumped up and pointless anyway--if a few reports are to be believed), everyone has a narrative. Whatever answer you prefer (innocent, guilty, or somewhere in between), you can find a report supporting your already confirmed opinion (just like modern-day religion, eh?). No need to let facts determine the outcome. Not now and not after whatever conclusion is reached.

Kingspoint

01-26-2015, 02:35 PM

Have to agree Sultan of Swing. This is a non-story.

Who cares? Lot's of wasted time spent on the topic. There seriously isn't something else to talk about?

Dom Heffner

01-26-2015, 05:01 PM

Now this could be something. The NFL looking at a locker room attendant who was seen moving balls after officials approved.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/12232207/nfl-looking-new-england-patriots-locker-room-attendant-deflategate-investigation

The NFL has zeroed in on a New England Patriots locker room attendant who allegedly took the AFC Championship Game balls from the officials' locker room to another area on the way to the field, Fox Sports reported, citing sources.

According to Fox Sports, the league has interviewed him and has video.

The league is still gauging if any wrongdoing occurred, but he is a strong person of interest, according to the report.

Assembly Hall

01-26-2015, 05:43 PM

medford

01-26-2015, 06:08 PM

When have they been caught cheating before?

Spygate; they sacrificed a couple of picks and were fined a pretty hefty fine along with it.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/bet-you-never-thought-you-d-hear-bill-belichick-talk-spygate-again--but-he-did-210725215.html

757690

01-26-2015, 08:30 PM

Donder

01-26-2015, 08:59 PM

...or, Tom Brady got better at protecting the football as he matured from young kid to established pocket passer.

I mean, this is getting silly.

I must admit, your argument makes a lot of sense. So I decided to look at how other top-tier quarterbacks compare. I looked at quarterbacks that have been in the league more than 6 seasons (since I looked at Brady's first 6 seasons) and have been to at least one Super Bowl. Here's what I found (at the risk of making this conversation even sillier).

Peyton Manning: 1st 6 years- 2.3 fumbles per season... since- 1.4 fumbles per season
Ben Roethisberger: 1st 6 years- 2 fumbles per season... since- 2.6 fumbles per season
Joe Flacco: 1st 6 years- 2.3 fumbles per season... 2014- 3 fumbles
Aaron Rodgers: 1st 6 years as a started- 1.5 fumbles per season... 2014- 3 fumbles
Drew Brees: 1st 6 years as a starter- 1.3 fumbles per season... since- 1.3 fumbles per season
Eli Manning: 1st 6 years as full-time starter- 2.3 fumbles per season... since- 1.5 fumbles per season

To summarize, none of these quarterbacks had more fumbles during their first six season (so much for Belichick not tolerating fumbles) and none have had fewer afterwards (Brees's average is identical). That's a pretty noticeable drop when compared to his peers.

Again I know this proves nothing. But "Belichick doesn't tolerate fumbles" and "Brady got better at protecting the football" may just be an oversimplification. Just my opinion.

Dom Heffner

01-26-2015, 10:20 PM

Loving that a ball boy is a "person of interest." Crazyness. Btw, I'm betting he's the only one who gets blamed for this.

If this is true- the ball boy tampered with them- it is quite pathetic.

Red Raindog

01-26-2015, 10:22 PM

Now this could be something. The NFL looking at a locker room attendant who was seen moving balls after officials approved.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/12232207/nfl-looking-new-england-patriots-locker-room-attendant-deflategate-investigation

so they found someone to take the fall --- yeah -- keep calling me silly -- I'm saying no way the NFL allows Brady to take the hit but I'm in the camp that says the ball boy does not mess with the game balls on his own --

Dom Heffner

01-26-2015, 10:35 PM

I must admit, your argument makes a lot of sense. So I decided to look at how other top-tier quarterbacks compare. I looked at quarterbacks that have been in the league more than 6 seasons (since I looked at Brady's first 6 seasons) and have been to at least one Super Bowl. Here's what I found (at the risk of making this conversation even sillier).

Peyton Manning: 1st 6 years- 2.3 fumbles per season... since- 1.4 fumbles per season
Ben Roethisberger: 1st 6 years- 2 fumbles per season... since- 2.6 fumbles per season
Joe Flacco: 1st 6 years- 2.3 fumbles per season... 2014- 3 fumbles
Aaron Rodgers: 1st 6 years as a started- 1.5 fumbles per season... 2014- 3 fumbles
Drew Brees: 1st 6 years as a starter- 1.3 fumbles per season... since- 1.3 fumbles per season
Eli Manning: 1st 6 years as full-time starter- 2.3 fumbles per season... since- 1.5 fumbles per season

To summarize, none of these quarterbacks had more fumbles during their first six season (so much for Belichick not tolerating fumbles) and none have had fewer afterwards (Brees's average is identical). That's a pretty noticeable drop when compared to his peers.

Again I know this proves nothing. But "Belichick doesn't tolerate fumbles" and "Brady got better at protecting the football" may just be an oversimplification. Just my opinion.

Your numbers are off. Aaron Rodgers fumbled 12 times this year, not 3. Brady 6. At least get it right. I'm looking at your numbers and "2.3 a season" for any QB seems off.

Rodgers has had years where's been sacked 50 times. You have to take the number of hits they are taking into account.

Let's do a little more in depth analysis with correct numbers.

I'm not seeing where you're getting them from.

Brady was 26th in being sacked. Dalton was less than that and had one fewer fumble this year.

Donder

01-26-2015, 10:41 PM

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/26/7ad254f7345c11216159c9de0d131985.jpg

From NFL.com. Help me out. What am I missing?

Donder

01-26-2015, 10:47 PM

Ok, never mind. I see my mistake now. I probably won't refigure tonight. But I'd love to see the results if someone else wants to!

Dom Heffner

01-26-2015, 10:49 PM

Ok, never mind. I see my mistake now. I probably won't refigure tonight. But I'd love to see the results if someone else wants to!

Do you think Andy Dalton is a cheater? How on earth could he fumble less than Brady, who is playing with footballs that are easier to grip because he cheats?

Simon Rhymon

01-26-2015, 11:03 PM

Loving that a ball boy is a "person of interest." Crazyness. Btw, I'm betting he's the only one who gets blamed for this.

If I was the ball boy, I'd sing like a bird. I wouldn't take the fall for anybody ... unless the made it worth my while. :laugh: Nah...not really.

Donder

01-26-2015, 11:07 PM

I lied, I went back and looked at who I consider the big three.

Brady's 1st 6 seasons- 9.8 fumbles per season... Since- 5.1
Peyton's 1st 6 seasons- 5.5 fumbles per season... Since- 4.1
Rodger's 1st 6 seasons- 6.2 fumbles... 2014- 10

So even after my mistake, Brady's fumbles still mysteriously cut in half beginning in 2007. I know, I know, he got better at protecting the football.

As for Dalton, he's been pretty consistent about not fumbling the football. Unlike Brady's early years. I don't know, maybe he's cheating. If so he should let his teammates in on his secret since they were middle of the pack in fumbles. His team hasn't defied 1 in 16,233 odds in fumble prevention like the Patriots.

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 12:08 AM

The 1 in 16,000 odds thing is filled with holes. That is not a scientific study that guy did.

It counted incomplete passes as fumble opportunities. I mean, come on.

Again- if we look at rushing attempts plus completed passes, the Ravens did better than the Patriots.

Your data is meaningless because # of fumbles per year is also influenced by the number of times a QB is touched.

What would be a better indicator would be fumbles /hit, which probably can't be computed.

You're assuming each QB faces an equal opportunity at fumbling the ball. That isn 't the case.

bigredmechanism

01-27-2015, 12:09 AM

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 12:24 AM

Tom Brady is second all time with lowest interception rate.

Pretty weird for a guy throwing a ball that is so much easier to catch than everyone else.

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 12:36 AM

A little more info on the ballboy:

http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=12232207

The location in question was a bathroom in which the attendant can be seen in the video entering and exiting in 90 seconds with the 24 footballs provided by both teams, according to Pro Football Talk, which cited an anonymous league source.

Could he have had to go to the bathroom?

Could he have deflated 11 balls in 90 seconds?

Why does he have the Colts' footballs?

kaldaniels

01-27-2015, 02:08 AM

A little more info on the ballboy:

http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=12232207

Could he have had to go to the bathroom?

Could he have deflated 11 balls in 90 seconds?

Why does he have the Colts' footballs?

Why did the balls go in the potty? Did he wash his hands? Flush?

bigredmechanism

01-27-2015, 02:51 AM

Wait. A ball boy had the balls? CHEATRIOTS!

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 08:57 AM

Why did the balls go in the potty? Did he wash his hands? Flush?

These do not leave your sight.

What if that's what he was told?

12 footballs in 90 seconds?

That's 8.8 seconds per football if we say he doctored 11 of the 12.

Chip R

01-27-2015, 10:12 AM

Why did the balls go in the potty? Did he wash his hands? Flush?

No cameras in the bathroom.

Sea Ray

01-27-2015, 10:16 AM

With the way Belichick and Bob Kraft came out recently on this, they're confident that their tracks are covered and the NFL won't be able to prove anything here. I think they're probably right on that

Razor Shines

01-27-2015, 10:54 AM

These do not leave your sight.

What if that's what he was told?

12 footballs in 90 seconds?

That's 8.8 seconds per football if we say he doctored 11 of the 12.

I heard his ball boy buddies said he got "Maggie's drawers"- he wasn't any good. Average man would be lucky to deflate 7 balls. Here 11 of 12 are perfectly to Brady's liking? That dog don't hunt.

RiverRat13

01-27-2015, 12:20 PM

Saw this posted on another site:

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 01:50 PM

Caveat Emperor

01-27-2015, 02:01 PM

No cameras in the bathroom.

"Spygate" would take on an entirely different meaning if we learned that there were.

George Anderson

01-27-2015, 02:06 PM

I could be wrong, I think the NFL ends up looking silly here. I agree with you.

What should the NFL have did instead when contacted about the illegal footballs? Respond with "yes, we know its in the rule book but we didn't expect anyone to follow it" or "cheating is no big deal because we know every single team does it" ?

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 02:06 PM

"Spygate" would take on an entirely different meaning if we learned that there were.

The more I read about Spygate...the more stuff that comes out of that. It wasn't just filming. Some stuff, that, if true, would be absolutely unrepairable from a public relations standpoint. Goodell just wanted it to go away.

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 02:13 PM

What should the NFL have did instead when contacted about the illegal footballs? Respond with "yes, we know its in the rule book but we didn't expect anyone to follow it" or "cheating is no big deal because we know every single team does it" ?

Well- first of all, they were contacted by bitter rivals. You're aware the person who opened it up is a former Jets exec who has no love for the Patriots. The reason they were contacted also was false- Baltimore griped about their kicks having "no lift." The Pats don't touch their kicking balls and even if they did, the Ravens kicked above average. Instead of stopping and thinking about it, the NFL goes right down the rabbit hole without even thinking how they would prove their case.

Secondly- they leak information and then tell everyone else they shouldn't be talking about it. Typical stuff.

I don't know how you prove this, though maybe the ball boy will admit he did something.

traderumor

01-27-2015, 02:13 PM

Do you think Andy Dalton is a cheater? How on earth could he fumble less than Brady, who is playing with footballs that are easier to grip because he cheats?I think the position is "Brady fumbles significantly less than he used to, maybe it has something to do with this current issue," not that he fumbles less than other QB's. If there is an advantage, it is only within his own abilities to avoid fumbles and why is my understanding of that line of reasoning.

traderumor

01-27-2015, 02:17 PM

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 02:39 PM

I think the position is "Brady fumbles significantly less than he used to, maybe it has something to do with this current issue," not that he fumbles less than other QB's. If there is an advantage, it is only within his own abilities to avoid fumbles and why is my understanding of that line of reasoning.

I can't believe he throws that many easy balls to catch and is second all time in lowest interception percentage.

Unreal, isn't it?

traderumor

01-27-2015, 02:42 PM

Is your being illogical satirical?

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 02:45 PM

Is your being illogical satirical?

It's such an advantage to catch a deflated ball that, wow, I can't believe more defenders don't intercept him.

Unless you want to argue it's only easier for one side to catch...

traderumor

01-27-2015, 02:51 PM

It's such an advantage to catch a deflated ball that, wow, I can't believe more defenders don't intercept him.

Unless you want to argue it's only easier for one side to catch...
My argument would be that drops, by receiver and db's would be the relevant stat, not int's for your satire to work and not look like a goof advancing an illogical argument

Dom Heffner

01-27-2015, 02:57 PM

My argument would be that drops, by receiver and db's would be the relevant stat, not int's for your satire to work and not look like a goof advancing an illogical argument

Is a deflated ball easier to catch? (Edit: I do see where you mention DB's, sorry)

Again- no need to call my argument logical or illogical, just stick to facts.

Is a deflated ball easier to catch or not?

He throws a ball that is so easy to catch....yet his interception rate is second lowest in history.

traderumor

01-27-2015, 03:02 PM

Is a deflated ball easier to catch for only one side?

Again- no need to call my argument logical or illogical, just stick to facts.

Is a deflated ball easier to catch or not?Your question is based on a false premise. His interception rate is not necessarily correlated to "ease of catching the ball." There are other factors involved, which I guess are so obvious that I assumed you were attempting to be sarcastic/satirical, but then it started looking like you are just using faulty logic to ask a "have you stopped beating your wife" type question. Perry Mason you are not.