| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Inflate a ball to 14.5 PSI (the minimum) in a room at 72 degrees, have them inspected inside, then take them outside into freezing weather. Let ideal gas law do its thing. "Cheating" without cheating. Voila.This was my original thinking, but then I saw the article saying they reported as much as 2 psi below minimum. Temp changes probably wouldn't account for that much difference.
And I saw something today that Belichek is claiming no knowledge of what went down, saying it was a Brady thing.
Depending on the temperature of where they were measured, it could easily account for more than half the deflation. As was pointed out by the calculations above, if they were inflated and measured at 80F, then you are looking at 1.5psi difference, and 90F accounts for 2psi. (edit: The game temp is significantly warmer than I was expecting, at 51F. People were talking about the game being cold, and 51F is t-shirt, light jacket in rain, weather.)
But this still doesn't answer in my mind how it could possibly happen. They get supplied by the team to the officials for measurement. They should be in the hands of the officials after that, so any tampering should implicate officials. Not to mention how many officials were handling the balls during the game with none of them noticing.
Why teams are supplying their own balls is another question I have. Can the NFL really not afford to pay for all 27 game balls, they can only spring for the 3 kickoff ones? And why are teams supplying the balls that get used with their own offensive line? That just asks for them to be tampered with. Those balls should be mixed up so teams do not know whether they are getting one they supplied or not, so any tampering can backfire.
I have no real stakes in this. I don't care about the Pats. I just am laughing at how ridiculous it is that this type of cheating is even possible. The whole system has to be designed to allow it.
|
Exactly my point before, the NFL really has not cared about this issue previously or they would simply supply the balls themselves for the games and not let them from their own control.
I think it will be very interesting to see what the exact investigation turns up in this event. Also if this is such a big deal then they should indeed look into the Green Bay Packers as well. Which I doubt that they will. This became an issue because the Colts were embarrassed by their absolute lack of preparedness for the game and got embarrassed so they reached out and said there was an issue. now their fans wont be screaming for the coaches head and the players heads as they got drummed but have deflected the loss onto the team that beat them. Oh Oh look over here something was not right that is why we lost the evil Patriots. This smells of sour grapes especially when it is being reported the Ravens told the Colts to look into this. They knew they could not do it because they already looked like whiners complaining how they were not prepared for the formations changes implemented against them. Always easier to blame someone else for your own mistakes. Why didn't the Ravens pick up the TE who ran free on those plays? because they focused on the man who was called ineligible because their defense coordinator was not able to figure out what was different and adapt.
So no I don't think these underinflated balls is a big deal. The patriots and Green bay should not lose draft picks because of this. if the NFL truly wants this problem solved and are worried about it (which they don't they want higher scoring in these games ) they should take control of the balls themselves. But they don't want that. They want records broken they want more precise passes so they want the quarterbacks more comfortable passing the ball. So they wont make any discussions until after the Super Bowl till this dies down some and more than likely I guess they may fine and take draft picks from the Patriots only and hope this goes away. But it wont and teams and their quarterbacks will continue to do what they have been doing since this is a non issue. The whole thing is a shame and a big much to do about nothing but since they already have a black eye on the Ray Rice issue they will want this to go away as well.
Inflate a ball to 14.5 PSI (the minimum) in a room at 72 degrees, have them inspected inside, then take them outside into freezing weather. Let ideal gas law do its thing. "Cheating" without cheating. Voila.This was my original thinking, but then I saw the article saying they reported as much as 2 psi below minimum. Temp changes probably wouldn't account for that much difference.
And I saw something today that Belichek is claiming no knowledge of what went down, saying it was a Brady thing.
Depending on the temperature of where they were measured, it could easily account for more than half the deflation. As was pointed out by the calculations above, if they were inflated and measured at 80F, then you are looking at 1.5psi difference, and 90F accounts for 2psi. (edit: The game temp is significantly warmer than I was expecting, at 51F. People were talking about the game being cold, and 51F is t-shirt, light jacket in rain, weather.)
But this still doesn't answer in my mind how it could possibly happen. They get supplied by the team to the officials for measurement. They should be in the hands of the officials after that, so any tampering should implicate officials. Not to mention how many officials were handling the balls during the game with none of them noticing.
Why teams are supplying their own balls is another question I have. Can the NFL really not afford to pay for all 27 game balls, they can only spring for the 3 kickoff ones? And why are teams supplying the balls that get used with their own offensive line? That just asks for them to be tampered with. Those balls should be mixed up so teams do not know whether they are getting one they supplied or not, so any tampering can backfire.
I have no real stakes in this. I don't care about the Pats. I just am laughing at how ridiculous it is that this type of cheating is even possible. The whole system has to be designed to allow it.
Well, like I mentioned, this whole thing is fascinating me, and it sounds like officials measure the balls pre-game and then give them back to the teams to keep on the sidelines.
What the heck kind of equipment management is that?
I doubt anything will ever be proved, but boy, it shows that even a multi-billion-dollar industry can be insanely stupid about managing its assets...
I had originally dismissed the issue of the Patriots deflating footballs as being insignificant, and in the outcome of the AFC championship game with the Colts I doubt it made a big difference; 45-7 is 45-7. The bigger question is the suspicion that it's been a pattern.
I had been mostly thinking in terms of passing. A softer ball is easier to throw and catch, sure, but that seemed to be a bit of a personal preference thing. The larger issue I hadn't thought of until I heard a retired NFL running back talking about it was not about passing at all. It was about fumbles. The football is easier to hold and prevent defenders from dislodging it when it's underinflated.
Guess who leads the league over the last 5 years in fewest fumbles per play? The Patriots.
That's nothing surprising on its own; ball security involves some luck, but it's also a skill and a mindset that you can emphasize in practice, and some teams are better at it than others. A well-coached team like the Pats you'd expect to fare well at keeping the ball.
The surprising thing was that they weren't just first; they were first by a country mile. The gap between the Pats and the #2 team was the same as the gap between the #2 team and the #27 team in terms of plays per fumble. That's a statistical outlier, and one that correlates with the effect of an underinflated football.
Is that evidence of cheating? No, but it is an interesting data point in the fact pattern when people ask, "Who cares? What difference does it make anyway?"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So no I don't think these underinflated balls is a big deal. The patriots and Green bay should not lose draft picks because of this...
So can I place you squarely in the corner of, "Cheating is OK as long as I feel it doesn't affect the outcome of a game" camp?
Seriously. The NFL's (mostly useless) report today was that the balls were fully-inflated on inspection pre-game, but underinflated on inspection at halftime.
But that's OK, because it didn't affect the overall outcome of the game?
I just want to make sure I understand this reasoning.
It's a serious question. "Are the rules that players find annoying perfectly OK to ignore, as long as ignoring those rules has no significant impact on the game?"
EDIT: And yep, it's a pet peeve of mine that I see mostly in East Coast or Texas fans. "It's perfectly OK if we stretch the rules to our advantage. But if the other team does it, we're going to scream holy murder!"
What would the Pats fans be saying if Baltimore had won, and it turned out that Baltimore had intentionally deflated game balls. "Oh, it's no big deal," does not appear on my Terminator-style list of possible responses from them...
EDIT2: I mean, I know both Seattle and Denver fans who have said, "Yeah, we should have lost that game. The refs really blew it. But hey, we'll take it." The East Coast and Texas fans I know are always, "Yeah, them's the breaks, boy! <Obscenity!!!>" Maybe it's from being too far from their native lands, or from having nothing to do in the winter other than obsess about sports, but I find East Coast and Texas sports fans intolerable during the wintertime. Once sports seasons end, they're perfectly nice people...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't worry, we Texas and East Coast fans are just as tired of all of the Seattle fans that didn't exist until a couple of years ago. The ones that couldn't pick David Krieg, Curt Warner, or Steve Largent out of a line-up, claim to be "life long" fans, and are old enough to know them. And probably have never been to Seattle in their life.
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't worry, we Texas and East Coast fans are just as tired of all of the Seattle fans that didn't exist until a couple of years ago. The ones that couldn't pick David Krieg, Curt Warner, or Steve Largent out of a line-up, claim to be "life long" fans, and are old enough to know them. And probably have never been to Seattle in their life.
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.
OK. You get a gold star just for Steve Largent.
Now there lives one of the "most underappreciated Seattle players EVER!"
My wife and I also hand-contructed a fabulous "clipboard Jesus" for my brother, just before they traded poor Charlie away.
And I have to love my POOR brother! He used to love going to an empty stadium for an enjoyable afternoon of hilariously-atrocious hijinks. Now he actually has to deal with football. He's not sure whether to be delighted or disgusted...
EDIT: And just for "full disclosure", I was a die-hard 49er fan through the 70's and 80's 'til they forced out DeBartolo, browbeat Montana into leaving, and generally destroyed the organization from the top down.
I still hate Steve Young for taking advantage of it all. Feh on his HoF career, I say. Feh! Now, where did I put my onions...?
EDIT2: So really, all I root for these days is for the Raiders to finally finish a perfect 0-16, and for Dallas to get humiliated one more time. Old rivalries die hard...
As a Seahawks fan I just want a good Superbowl and I'd be happy if they just dealt with this after the big game. This is not to diminish the seriousness of what was done it's just that any action now would just ruin the Superbowl for both teams.
I want to play the best Patriots team possible. I want no there to be no question who the better team is on that day. So if Tom Brady is going to be penalized then do it next season and lets get on with our Superbowl.
I'm sure more will come out from the investigation, penalties will be administered, draft picks will be removed, and teams might sue teams for financial damages. Who knows....
But if Hawks vs. Green Bay has taught me anything is that games can often come down to the smallest of details (and luck). In a game like that bending the rules in your favor might be the difference between a win or a loss. Now the Patriots game vs the colts was not in question when you look at the end score, but prior to the game someone seemed perfectly ok with the idea that 2 PSI might very well be that small edge that could win a close game and decided to cheat.
The fact that the patriots won in such a manner that eliminated the effectiveness or need of their cheating does not absolve them of being a cheater.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't worry, we Texas and East Coast fans are just as tired of all of the Seattle fans that didn't exist until a couple of years ago. The ones that couldn't pick David Krieg, Curt Warner, or Steve Largent out of a line-up, claim to be "life long" fans, and are old enough to know them. And probably have never been to Seattle in their life.
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.
OK. You get a gold star just for Steve Largent.
Now there lives one of the "most underappreciated Seattle players EVER!"
My wife and I also hand-contructed a fabulous "clipboard Jesus" for my brother, just before they traded poor Charlie away.
And I have to love my POOR brother! He used to love going to an empty stadium for an enjoyable afternoon of hilariously-atrocious hijinks. Now he actually has to deal with football. He's not sure whether to be delighted or disgusted...
EDIT: And just for "full disclosure", I was a die-hard 49er fan through the 70's and 80's 'til they forced out DeBartolo, browbeat Montana into leaving, and generally destroyed the organization from the top down.
I still hate Steve Young for taking advantage of it all. Feh on his HoF career, I say. Feh! Now, where did I put my onions...?EDIT2: So really, all I root for these days is for the Raiders to finally finish a perfect 0-16, and for Dallas to get humiliated one more time. Old rivalries die hard...
The funniest thing is, DeBartolo wasn't nearly as criminal as the Owner of Pilot and the Browns, Haslem, yet Haslem still gets to keep his team.
I was always kind of a Knox fan, thought he was a classy coach, so I followed the Seahawks a little in the '80s. My traditional team growing up was the Jets (and I'll go back if Johnson ever sells the team), but now it's pretty much just the Texans. Astros and Rockets in their sports, U of Texas for college (didn't graduate, but went there for a couple of years), and the Penguins, as I loved, loved, LOVED watching Mario Lemieux back in the day. If it weren't for his illness, he'd go down as the GOAT, I'm sure.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4; Contributor; Publisher, Legendary Games
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't worry, we Texas and East Coast fans are just as tired of all of the Seattle fans that didn't exist until a couple of years ago. The ones that couldn't pick David Krieg, Curt Warner, or Steve Largent out of a line-up, claim to be "life long" fans, and are old enough to know them. And probably have never been to Seattle in their life.
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.
I'm 44 and still have my Costacos Brothers posters of Steve Largent and Kenny Easley (my all-time favorite Seahawk) and a bunch of Al's Auto Supply weekly highlight posters they put out in the late 80s.
The wife makes me keep them in the attic, though. Said they looked a bit too dorm-roomy. I did have to concede the point. You can only roll and tack up a poster so many times before it gets pretty raggedy. My 17-year-old, though, has a bunch of my old posters up in his room; he's 17, he gets to have his room look like a dorm if he wants!
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.
yeah Jason has you here,
I myself have always been a fan of the Seahawks and the Sonics (R.I.P.) i worked at Seahawks stadium when it first opened (as a security guard, and when it was actually called Seahawks Stadium) my daughter was born in Seattle.I've seen some pretty shitty weather as a Seahawks fan, its nice to finally see some sun, so i'm going to soak it up:-D
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.No bandwagon will EVER fill up as quickly as the Chicago Bulls bandwagon in the early 90s.
Nope, probably not.
But I was a Bulls fan pre-Jordan — in the Quinten Dailey/Orlando Woolridge years — so I whacked plenty of 'em with my cane and told 'em to GET OFF MY LAWN.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So no I don't think these underinflated balls is a big deal. The patriots and Green bay should not lose draft picks because of this...So can I place you squarely in the corner of, "Cheating is OK as long as I feel it doesn't affect the outcome of a game" camp?
I'm in the camp that says you have to prove that it's actually cheating. That means showing intent to deflate the balls, under who's orders, how it was done and when.
Did some over eager ball boy who happens to know Brady's preference do it on his own? Or does Belichick have an assigned "ball deflator"?
It also matters how common this is/was for the Patriots. Did they do it all season? Have they been doing it since 2007? Or was this a one time, high pressure game thing?
Then when it gets to the actual punishment, the impact of the cheating does matter. The NFL has prescribed punishments for various levels of offenses and this has to be considered. Not all cheating is punished equally. For example, PED's are cheating, but the team isn't punished, the individual player is. Otherwise if we consider all cheating to be equally heinous and should void all wins, that means any team that had someone use PED's during their season has to give back their super bowl rings. I suspect that would be quite a few.
Lastly, I think the overall righteous indignation about cheating needs to end. To me it stinks of statements like:
sanctity of the game
love of the game
sportsmanship
These sound like good ideals, but they aren't really representative of what the NFL is, which is a business in which millions of dollars (or even billions if you're an owner) are at stake. When people's livelihoods are on the line, and their livelihoods have the possibility of making them very wealthy, they are naturally going to look for any and every advantage they can gain.
These aren't "athletes" in the Victorian sense of the word. They aren't there to engage in contests of pure athletic skill. It's a cutthroat entertainment business and if you don't use every fiber of your being to take everything you can, someone else will take what you have from you.
I don't say this to apologize for the cheaters, but rather as a fan I get really annoyed at the sanctimonious bullshit being spouted (particularly by former players). If the Patriots cheated, they should be punished in a way that is commensurate with their crime. Lost draft picks for example is a very powerful punishment that can affect a team for years, hampering their ability to field the best team they can for quite a while.
I'm not a Patriots fan either. The team that breaks my heart is the Vikings.
|
|
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.No bandwagon will EVER fill up as quickly as the Chicago Bulls bandwagon in the early 90s.
I was talking football, but I agree. But they did have something Seattle doesn't: arguably the best player to ever play the game, so it was a little less annoying.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.yeah Jason has you here,
I myself have always been a fan of the Seahawks and the Sonics (R.I.P.) i worked at Seahawks stadium when it first opened (as a security guard, and when it was actually called Seahawks Stadium) my daughter was born in Seattle.
I've seen some pretty s@*@ty weather as a Seahawks fan, its nice to finally see some sun, so i'm going to soak it up:-D
You guys do realize I said "outside of Washington State and northern Oregon" (i.e., the place Seattle fans should come from). Locals following a team when they get good isn't really bandwagoning, it's a team finally putting a product on the field worth watching.
It's the "Seattle" fans born and raised in Texas, and still live in Texas, and have never left Texas, for instance, that my disdain is directed toward.
Y'all are supposed to support your team! ;-)
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.yeah Jason has you here,
I myself have always been a fan of the Seahawks and the Sonics (R.I.P.) i worked at Seahawks stadium when it first opened (as a security guard, and when it was actually called Seahawks Stadium) my daughter was born in Seattle.
I've seen some pretty s@*@ty weather as a Seahawks fan, its nice to finally see some sun, so i'm going to soak it up:-DYou guys do realize I said "outside of Washington State and northern Oregon" (i.e., the place Seattle fans should come from). Locals following a team when they get good isn't really bandwagoning, it's a team finally putting a product on the field worth watching.
It's the "Seattle" fans born and raised in Texas, and still live in Texas, and have never left Texas, for instance, that my disdain is directed toward.
Y'all are supposed to support your team! ;-)
It's not fair man. Jerry Jones has ruined that team. They had a good run this year but they are 3 or 4 years away from being a solid contender for the championship games and by then Romo will be used up.
And the Texans? Really?
We've been patient long enough, we get to look outside the state for a decent team to watch. Plus the 12th man is our deal.
|
|
My wife is an Aggie, she concurs.
The Texans are fine. We're a QB, DB (Joseph isn't worth the high salary he's up for with his time in), and a run stopping MLB (Cush, I'm afraid, after two surgeries and a PED suspension - no more juicing - isn't the answer any more). We have a patient owner, Crennell where he's proven he belongs and thrives, A HC that did well using four different QBs in situations that mattered (and not just garbage time) because of injuries, and went 9-7 after a ridiculous 2-14 with a journeyman hipster with a noodle arm and too much brain, not enough instinct, much of the season. We were a play or two from the playoffs, to be frank, as well. A dropped pass here and a spectacular play by the other guy there go the other way, we had 11-5 in reach.
But, we're Houston. We'll get optimistic, get our heart's broken, then move on to the Rockets for more abuse. We're used to it.
Also, you can always at least keep it Gulf Coast and jump over to 'Nawlins. Ok, they suck too, but team shopping isn't where it's at. ;-)
|
|
We've been patient long enough, we get to look outside the state for a decent team to watch.
Bah! I laugh at your so-called patience. I'm a Saints fan. We are made of equal parts patience, beer, and Cajun food. Twenty years before the team ever made the playoffs. Forty-two years before a Super Bowl win.
As another Saints fan I say....drink more, it helps with the patience thing.
Also, the Pro Bowl (like most/all All-Star games) is a joke.
But I'm gonna be an Eagles bandwagoner soon enough!
Bah! I laugh at your so-called patience. I'm a Saints fan. We are made of equal parts patience, beer, and Cajun food. Twenty years before the team ever made the playoffs. Forty-two years before a Super Bowl win.
We've been patient long enough, we get to look outside the state for a decent team to watch.
What, are you saying that beer helps the hurt?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having been a Patriots fan for over 40 years I understand the pain one goes through for their team. Yes they are good now, but I remember the 70's, 80's and early 90's when we were happy to have made the playoffs. I was on the receiving end of the whipping the Patriots got from the Bears.
Losing to Green Bay in the Super Bowl and then losing our coach. But I stuck with them the Victor Kiem days of 2-14 when we were just happy to have a good running back John Stephens was one of the only things we could hang our hat on as a good player back then. Dark days. Now I am looking forward to a Super Bowl and glowing in the accomplishments of my team. But this thing which I feel is over inflated because of the hate towards my team from media and it is there on ESPN and those guys they hate the patriots and jump on board it frustrates me to no end.
If this was a big deal and cheating as people are saying now then why wasn't there an outcry when Rodgers announced what he was doing on National TV? No one even mentioned it that he was overinflating his balls.
So please don't tell me I am crying foul when it is only my team because it does seem to be only my team who is singled out an I feel I have every right to feel there is a double standard.
"So are their rules which are okay for players to ignore? Seems that way. The NFL if they did not want this to happen could have fixed the issue by easily not allowing anyone to touch the balls after they were tested. Problem fixed. But they don't want it fixed and did not think this an issue so they did not do that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A bunch of stuff
But this thing which I feel is over inflated because of the hate towards my team from media and it is there on ESPN and those guys they hate the patriots and jump on board it frustrates me to no end.
I guess thats not the only "inflation" problem in Patland!
"rimshot"
Niles ducks from the hurled items!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gruumash, the patriots history of loosing can't compare with the Pacific NW's history of crappy sports. It's not even close. Atlanta, Buffalo, Phoenix...maybe but New England?
The reason why Seahawks fans are crazy is because Seattlites are not accustomed to winning. People from outside the state can't fathom how some hawk fans would leaving the GB game early when the score was run up. Outsiders fail to understand Seattle's rich and storied history of loosing. We Seattle fans have been conditioned from birth with a notion that Seattle sports teams will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. One super bowl win is not going to change that mindset, only years of therapy and many championships.
Sorry your team got caught breaking the rules (again). The Patriots are the closest this modern age of football has to a dynasty and they have the greatest QB ever to play the game. So yeah, they have a target on their backs and that should be even more of a reason to play within the rules.
It's going to be a great game on Sunday. Can't wait!
|
|
If it were contained to the Pac NW, it wouldn't be an issue. It's when a few thousand people who could't find Seattle on a map, have never left Texas, and claim "life long" fandom when they were wearing a Brees jersey three years ago that the "haters" go buck wild. I guess never having been "good" before that has insulated y'all from the bandwagon "fans" people who live in other places are laughing at right now.
We are actually happy that life long fans finally have something to cheer for, believe it or not.
Also, considering how many Seahawk players have been caught sharing the same Adderal scrip, I'd hold of on the "cheating" talk. Seattle leads the league in PED/substance suspensions since Carroll took over. And Sherman was only able to win his appeal because of a leaky sample cup. ;-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having gone to Sonics game with more people in the audience wearing Lakers or Bulls jerseys than Sonics I can understand the frustration. (funny how you never see Bulls jerseys anymore).
What can I say, the Hawks have a lot of players with Attention Deficit Disorder...
Carroll must have a pharmacy that travels with him from team to team.
-MD
|
|
Having gone to Sonics game with more people in the audience wearing Lakers or Bulls jerseys than Sonics I can understand the frustration. (funny how you never see Bulls jerseys anymore).
What can I say, the Hawks have a lot of players with Attention Deficit Disorder...
Carroll must have a pharmacy that travels with him from team to team.
-MD
Carroll was a cheater in college, and Seattle leads the league in PED suspensions since he's been there. We might as well call this year's edition the Cheater Bowl.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4; Contributor; Publisher, Legendary Games
|
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.No bandwagon will EVER fill up as quickly as the Chicago Bulls bandwagon in the early 90s.Nope, probably not.
But I was a Bulls fan pre-Jordan — in the Quinten Dailey/Orlando Woolridge years — so I whacked plenty of 'em with my cane and told 'em to GET OFF MY LAWN.
I'm pretty sure Dailey played for the Sonics for a year or so towards the end of his career. The Bulls were pretty much a wasteland through the early 80s. When Gene Banks and a past-his-prime Artis Gilmore are some of your better players, yeesh.
|
|
Gruumash, the patriots history of loosing can't compare with the Pacific NW's history of crappy sports. It's not even close. Atlanta, Buffalo, Phoenix...maybe but New England?
The reason why Seahawks fans are crazy is because Seattlites are not accustomed to winning. People from outside the state can't fathom how some hawk fans would leaving the GB game early when the score was run up. Outsiders fail to understand Seattle's rich and storied history of loosing. We Seattle fans have been conditioned from birth with a notion that Seattle sports teams will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. One super bowl win is not going to change that mindset, only years of therapy and many championships.
Sorry your team got caught breaking the rules (again). The Patriots are the closest this modern age of football has to a dynasty and they have the greatest QB ever to play the game. So yeah, they have a target on their backs and that should be even more of a reason to play within the rules.
It's going to be a great game on Sunday. Can't wait!
Muad'Dib just to give you a little sports history. New England had it bad for quite a while. In recent history certainly we have had a plethora of success but not so long ago 1918 to 2003 the Red Sox went through a serious drought of not being able to win the big game otherwise known as the Curse of the Bambino. I understand that pain of losing.
The Patriots certainly had the title of being the worst team more than a few times in all of football in the late 80s and through the early 90's. So lets not play the who had it harder game. I think my friend Derek hit the nail on the head with the whole (cheating thing). Lets not go there okay.
I'm pretty sure Dailey played for the Sonics for a year or so towards the end of his career. The Bulls were pretty much a wasteland through the early 80s. When Gene Banks and a past-his-prime Artis Gilmore are some of your better players, yeesh.Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.No bandwagon will EVER fill up as quickly as the Chicago Bulls bandwagon in the early 90s.Nope, probably not.
But I was a Bulls fan pre-Jordan — in the Quinten Dailey/Orlando Woolridge years — so I whacked plenty of 'em with my cane and told 'em to GET OFF MY LAWN.
Buncha guys who should've been roleplayers starting — Dave Corzine, Rod Higgins, Ennis Whatley — and guys who should've been better than they were in David Greenwood, Reggie Theus, and Steve Johnson. Ugh.
Carroll was a cheater in college, and Seattle leads the league in PED suspensions since he's been there. We might as well call this year's edition the Cheater Bowl.
Yeah, trouble just seems to find Carroll, doesn't it?
"Seems to find"? When you generate it yourself, it didn't "find" you.
Let the battle of the cheaters commence!
Hey HoustonD, How many Seahawks were suspended for PED use this season?
"Seems to find"? When you generate it yourself, it didn't "find" you.
Let the battle of the cheaters commence!
I suppose "find" should've been in quotes... ;-)
Hey HoustonD, How many Seahawks were suspended for PED use this season?"Seems to find"? When you generate it yourself, it didn't "find" you.
Let the battle of the cheaters commence!
The answer is none.
Last season they had 5-6 (including Browner being suspended twice).
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.No bandwagon will EVER fill up as quickly as the Chicago Bulls bandwagon in the early 90s.I was talking football, but I agree. But they did have something Seattle doesn't: arguably the best player to ever play the game, so it was a little less annoying.
Richard Sherman called to say you're wrong.
:p
If this was a big deal and cheating as people are saying now then why wasn't there an outcry when Rodgers announced what he was doing on National TV? No one even mentioned it that he was overinflating his balls.
So please don't tell me I am crying foul when it is only my team because it does seem to be only my team who is singled out an I feel I have every right to feel there is a double standard.
Shameless double standards, yeah. ;)
BUT, it's their own damn fault that people mistrust the Patriots moreso than is usual for a winning team.
For example, I am from MA, and I remember looking at things from the other side. This moment was burned into my brain in 2004.
And even ten years later if someone said that he tampered with baseballs before the game I'd believe it in a second, due to that.
I'd probably believe it even if it were something as vague and molehillish as the current situation seems to be.
Curiouser and curiouser :/
Someone did some statistical analysis on it. The graphs wont load for me, I think because the site is overloaded, though.I had originally dismissed the issue of the Patriots deflating footballs as being insignificant, and in the outcome of the AFC championship game with the Colts I doubt it made a big difference; 45-7 is 45-7. The bigger question is the suspicion that it's been a pattern.
I had been mostly thinking in terms of passing. A softer ball is easier to throw and catch, sure, but that seemed to be a bit of a personal preference thing. The larger issue I hadn't thought of until I heard a retired NFL running back talking about it was not about passing at all. It was about fumbles. The football is easier to hold and prevent defenders from dislodging it when it's underinflated.
Guess who leads the league over the last 5 years in fewest fumbles per play? The Patriots.
That's nothing surprising on its own; ball security involves some luck, but it's also a skill and a mindset that you can emphasize in practice, and some teams are better at it than others. A well-coached team like the Pats you'd expect to fare well at keeping the ball.
The surprising thing was that they weren't just first; they were first by a country mile. The gap between the Pats and the #2 team was the same as the gap between the #2 team and the #27 team in terms of plays per fumble. That's a statistical outlier, and one that correlates with the effect of an underinflated football.
Is that evidence of cheating? No, but it is an interesting data point in the fact pattern when people ask, "Who cares? What difference does it make anyway?"
Someone did a response of why my previous post used bad statistics
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone did a response of why my previous post used bad statistics
The response itself is pretty terrible.
* If you do the math using fumbles per play instead of plays per fumble, you get a different number, yes. You find out that the odds are "only" one in 300 instead of one in 16,000 that the Patriots simply have been having good luck with fumbles.
* By-position analysis shows that the Patriots quarterbacks don't fumble very much, that the Patriots running backs don't fumble very much, and that the Patriots receivers don't fumble very much. All of which are independent (compare the NYG, who had the worst running backs, but the second-best receivers).
So even the reanalysis actually shows that, yes, there's definitely something there. The Patriots are systematically better at not-fumbling across the board in a way that transcends any one player or position and that is probably not due to chance.
This could be due to all sorts of things. The Pats could be systematically calling plays that are less likely to result in fumbles. The Pats could be systematically training their players better in ball-handling skills. The Pats could be paying more attention to ball-handling in their recruitment process. Or they could be doing something outside of the rules. The data don't tell us what they're doing. But I'm convinced they're doing something, when even the reanalysis shows that they're doing something....
|
|
Someone did a response of why my previous post used bad statistics
The response itself is pretty terrible.
* If you do the math using fumbles per play instead of plays per fumble, you get a different number, yes. You find out that the odds are "only" one in 300 instead of one in 16,000 that the Patriots simply have been having good luck with fumbles.
* By-position analysis shows that the Patriots quarterbacks don't fumble very much, that the Patriots running backs don't fumble very much, and that the Patriots receivers don't fumble very much. All of which are independent (compare the NYG, who had the worst running backs, but the second-best receivers).
So even the reanalysis actually shows that, yes, there's definitely something there. The Patriots are systematically better at not-fumbling across the board in a way that transcends any one player or position and that is probably not due to chance.
This could be due to all sorts of things. The Pats could be systematically calling plays that are less likely to result in fumbles. The Pats could be systematically training their players better in ball-handling skills. The Pats could be paying more attention to ball-handling in their recruitment process. Or they could be doing something outside of the rules. The data don't tell us what they're doing. But I'm convinced they're doing something, when even the reanalysis shows that they're doing something....
Or, if you actually watch Pats games, if you fumble they pull you out of the game and might not start you the next week. They also have one of the best scouting departments in football, and rarely make draft mistakes.
I can't stand the Pats (grew up a Jets fan), but they do a lot of things right that have nothing to do with ball PSI.
Or, if you actually watch Pats games, if you fumble they pull you out of the game and might not start you the next week.
I'm glad you agree that the Pats are doing something and that their low fumble rate is a consequence, not good luck.
Well, in spite of people railing against things I never said, I still see nothing whatsoever coming out of this aside from a $25,000 fine for Aaron Rogers, since he went ahead and confessed to ball tampering.
- The balls were reported at 2 psi under, but now that's under question. Considering the temperature change was good for almost a full psi, it's a pretty darned important number.
- The report that a ball handler took the balls into the bathroom for 90 seconds is just silly. That's just piling on. OK, he *could* have done something. But if you have no evidence, shut up.
- Again, the Pats have a ridiculously-low fumble rate, and people ask, "How long have they been underinflating the balls?" Well, you're jumping ahead of yourself, mister. We haven't even proved the answer of, "Once" yet. Don't go piling on 'til you've proved Case #1.
My objections are twofold:
#1: As mentioned, I'm "lawful". "Cheating is OK because football is a multi-billion-dollar form of entertainment" holds no weight with me whatsoever. I work for a company worth many times what the NFL is worth (kind of limits who I work for, but...). We compete on a daily basis for sales. Guess what? If we cheat/lie/mislead/bribe our customers, we get sued/fined/penalized. It's the nature of working in a multi-billion-dollar industry. The notion that we should "cut the Patriots some slack because football is ultra-competitive" offends me to the core. If you don't like a rule, lobby for it to be changed. Don't break it and hope you don't get caught.
#2: I'm an old-school Niners fan. I accept that all of their records will some day be broken. But watching them be broken by a team with a stream of asterisks after their wins (tuck rule, Spygate, InflateGate) is hurtful. Can't someone win honestly? Or at least cheat cleanly enough that no one notices?
Again the Patriots have already been tried, convicted, and penalized for cheating (Spygate). If they are caught cheating again (intentionally deflating balls to improve passing/decrease fumbles), the penalty should be proportionately increased. It MUST be greater than the previous penalty, not because of the nature of the crime, but because they obviously didn't learn from the first incident.
My honest belief? Nothing will ever be proved, and this will end up being the biggest non-story in January of 2015.
But putting yet another asterisk next to yet another Patriots win just depresses me...
Someone did a response of why my previous post used bad statistics
The response itself is pretty terrible.
* If you do the math using fumbles per play instead of plays per fumble, you get a different number, yes. You find out that the odds are "only" one in 300 instead of one in 16,000 that the Patriots simply have been having good luck with fumbles.
* By-position analysis shows that the Patriots quarterbacks don't fumble very much, that the Patriots running backs don't fumble very much, and that the Patriots receivers don't fumble very much. All of which are independent (compare the NYG, who had the worst running backs, but the second-best receivers).
So even the reanalysis actually shows that, yes, there's definitely something there. The Patriots are systematically better at not-fumbling across the board in a way that transcends any one player or position and that is probably not due to chance.
This could be due to all sorts of things. The Pats could be systematically calling plays that are less likely to result in fumbles. The Pats could be systematically training their players better in ball-handling skills. The Pats could be paying more attention to ball-handling in their recruitment process. Or they could be doing something outside of the rules. The data don't tell us what they're doing. But I'm convinced they're doing something, when even the reanalysis shows that they're doing something....
Yes, but 1 in 300 is not outside of what you would expect from a team that has a lot of money to pick out top tallent and has been successful at doing so. It does not put it in the "only explanation is cheating" category that the original article implies. By random chance, with 32 teams, you would expect a team like this to pop up about once every 10 years (assuming teams were not linked data, which we know to be false since the same key players are on them from year to year). The ability of skilled coaches to manipulate the team would make it more frequent if the coach is above average for the league.
|
|
Well, in spite of people railing against things I never said, I still see nothing whatsoever coming out of this aside from a $25,000 fine for Aaron Rogers, since he went ahead and confessed to ball tampering.
- The balls were reported at 2 psi under, but now that's under question. Considering the temperature change was good for almost a full psi, it's a pretty darned important number.
- The report that a ball handler took the balls into the bathroom for 90 seconds is just silly. That's just piling on. OK, he *could* have done something. But if you have no evidence, shut up.
- Again, the Pats have a ridiculously-low fumble rate, and people ask, "How long have they been underinflating the balls?" Well, you're jumping ahead of yourself, mister. We haven't even proved the answer of, "Once" yet. Don't go piling on 'til you've proved Case #1.
My objections are twofold:#1: As mentioned, I'm "lawful". "Cheating is OK because football is a multi-billion-dollar form of entertainment" holds no weight with me whatsoever. I work for a company worth many times what the NFL is worth (kind of limits who I work for, but...). We compete on a daily basis for sales. Guess what? If we cheat/lie/mislead/bribe our customers, we get sued/fined/penalized. It's the nature of working in a multi-billion-dollar industry. The notion that we should "cut the Patriots some slack because football is ultra-competitive" offends me to the core. If you don't like a rule, lobby for it to be changed. Don't break it and hope you don't get caught.
#2: I'm an old-school Niners fan. I accept that all of their records will some day be broken. But watching them be broken by a team with a stream of asterisks after their wins (tuck rule, Spygate, InflateGate) is hurtful. Can't someone win honestly? Or at least cheat cleanly enough that no one notices?
Again the Patriots have already been tried, convicted, and penalized for cheating (Spygate). If they are caught cheating again (intentionally deflating balls to improve...
Do not forget that Tyson just admitted he got the math wrong and it was 90 degrees that the balls had to be inflated in for that to happen. Couple that with the revelation that it was probably less than 2psi, and, well…
Yes, but 1 in 300 is not outside of what you would expect from a team that has a lot of money to pick out top tallent and has been successful at doing so.This could be due to all sorts of things. The Pats could be systematically calling plays that are less likely to result in fumbles. The Pats could be systematically training their players better in ball-handling skills. The Pats could be paying more attention to ball-handling in their recruitment process. Or they could be doing something outside of the rules. The data don't tell us what they're doing. But I'm convinced they're doing something, when even the reanalysis shows that they're doing something....
Goodness, gracious, neither is 1 in 16,000 outside of what you would expect if we're talking about something that a team systematically tries to select for. (The odds of all 22 starters for the Patriots being male is approximately 1 in 4 million, but no one is surprised by that.)
It does not put it in the "only explanation is cheating" category that the original article implies.
Is that what it implies? I reread the conclusion and this is what it said.
Could the Patriots be so good that they just defy the numbers? As my friend theorized: Perhaps they’ve invented a revolutionary in-house way to protect the ball, or perhaps they’ve intentionally stocked their skill positions with players who don’t have a propensity to fumble. Or perhaps still, they call plays which intentionally result in a lower percentage of fumbles. Or maybe its just that they play with deflated footballs on offense. It could be any combination of the above.
But regardless of what, specifically, is causing these numbers, the fact remains: this is an extremely abnormal occurrence and is NOT simply random fluctuation.
Even the reanalysis confirms that: this is not simply random fluctuation.
EDIT: And yep, it's a pet peeve of mine that I see mostly in East Coast or Texas fans. "It's perfectly OK if we stretch the rules to our advantage. But if the other team does it, we're going to scream holy murder!"
What would the Pats fans be saying if Baltimore had won, and it turned out that Baltimore had intentionally deflated game balls. "Oh, it's no big deal," does not appear on my Terminator-style list of possible responses from them...
I sure remember a lot of bloody murder being screamed when my Broncos wiped the floor with the Pats last year in the playoffs by abusing pick plays. Legal at the time (probably shouldn't have been and as a big fan of defensive play I'll take any ruling that cuts down on video game offense) but that definitely didn't keep the east coast from whining about it.