11 of 12 footballs deflated.... Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Well, as a side note, the Pats haven't really had "the guy" at RB.   Seems to me BB has no problem saying "Hey, fucknuts, did you just fumble?  Sit your *** on the bench until I can cut you."

That might have something to do with fumble rates.
5/12/2015 10:26 PM
edsortails
Posts: 7127 (0)
Hall of Famer
43 104 1 1 1 1
Pro
really it just points out the genius of BB.....knowing what the franchise was trying to get away with, he brings in Stevan Ridley with a chronic fumbling problem and uses him to throw everyone off the scent



they really do think of every detail in New England
5/12/2015 11:36 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Some of the players don't.   Like Hernandez with his pesky home surveillance system.
5/13/2015 7:01 AM
AlCheez
Posts: 3375 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 59 54
Pro
Posted by damag on 5/12/2015 6:10:00 PM (view original):
I've modified my thinking on this issue a little. A friend showed me an article at sharpfootballanalysis.com. If this is at all true the "easier to throw" thing is a huge smokescreen.

The rule allowing teams to prepare their own footballs was passed in 2006.
In 2007 the Patriots hired this McNally dude, "the deflator."
From 2007 till now the Patriots have fumbled at a FAR lower rate than before, and than any other team in the NFL.

NOW - with stats and timeline to back it up - THIS is a rat I think smells far worse.

That statistical analysis came out right as the whole thing started and was pretty roundly criticized in terms of the data set used, the analysis, etc, but it hasn't stopped him from beating that drum.  Here's the  a summary: http://regressing.deadspin.com/why-those-statistics-about-the-patriots-fumbles-are-mos-1681805710.

I'm not saying there's not something to it, but the numbers aren't as crazy as Sharp made them out to be.


5/13/2015 7:07 AM (edited)
AlCheez
Posts: 3375 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 59 54
Pro
The most obvious flaw in Sharp's analysis was that he included Brandon Tate's 11 special teams fumbles with Cincinnati in his analysis of how players performed in New England and elsewhere.  Which would be bad enough if he was including special teams in the analysis since they use different balls in the kicking game, but he also didn't include the special team touches that all of those fumbles occurred on, so he has Tate in the analysis with 11 fumbles on 35 touches.  If you're only looking at rushes and reception, he had 0 fumbles on 35 touches.  Which means if you take out Tate's fumbles, for the players he analyzed, they averaged 105 touches per fumble in NE and 100 elsewhere.  Which is improvement in NE, but hardly eye popping.  

5/13/2015 7:17 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Numbers are fun when you manipulate them to support your point.
5/13/2015 10:00 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
That said, as I said earlier, it's the intention that's important not the result. 

Footballs are inspected and approved for game play.   Team/player/equipment personnel manipulate said footballs after that approval.    That's problematic.

5/13/2015 10:03 AM
edsortails
Posts: 7127 (0)
Hall of Famer
43 104 1 1 1 1
Pro
I get that these were out of the range but why have a range at all if you can't adjust to your preference?
5/13/2015 12:15 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

You can adjust within range.   Like a speed limit.    If you get pulled for driving under 40 or over 70 on I-Patriotscheat, you run the risk of getting a ticket for doing 35 or 75.   That's why there's a range.

5/13/2015 12:27 PM
AlCheez
Posts: 3375 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 59 54
Pro
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/13/2015 10:03:00 AM (view original):
That said, as I said earlier, it's the intention that's important not the result. 

Footballs are inspected and approved for game play.   Team/player/equipment personnel manipulate said footballs after that approval.    That's problematic.

I completely agree - I just think people are reaching for ways to trump up the result, and in this case to "prove" the Patriots have been doing it for a long time.

And I don't have any trouble believing that they were, that study just doesn't come closed to constituting proof.


5/13/2015 1:17 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
People love to hate winners.  And, if said winner is down, give 'em a solid kick.   That's really all this "What about Brady's legacy?" BS is about. 
5/13/2015 1:26 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Wetzel had a great take on this today.

This entire issue is the NFL's fault, first for not correcting the initial ESPN report about footballs underinflated by more than 2 PSI:
Of course, that story wasn't true. It wasn't even close to true. Wells' report showed that none of the footballs, each measured twice, were that underinflated.
and second, for not just dealing with it immediately and rationally, with a punishment in line with similar offenses:
Goodell could have looked at the pressure levels, saw that in the context of natural weather-related deflation it was fairly insignificant, doled out some kind of fine or even sanction and killed the kerfuffle in its tracks. It would have saved his league from all sorts of negative headlines and conspiracy theories.

What's also clear is the NFL never cared about a whole lot about the inflation levels of footballs, probably because it doesn't impact the game very much. The refs check the footballs pregame with a pressure gauge (which vary wildly) and that's about it. It's all a loose guess. In November, when Carolina and Minnesota were caught trying to doctor the footballs by warming them on a cold day, they each got a warning and everyone laughed at the story.
5/13/2015 7:47 PM
The Taint
Posts: 12785 (0)
Hall of Famer
1013 3
Hall of Famer
Carolina and Minnesota did it in the open, on the sidelines ... Not behind a locked bathroom door. To me, there's a big difference.
5/13/2015 9:33 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
I don't know why that would be a 4 game/million dollar/two draft pick difference. Goodell ****** this up, making a mountain out of a molehill. And now he's going to lose in court.
5/13/2015 9:46 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by The Taint on 5/13/2015 9:33:00 PM (view original):
Carolina and Minnesota did it in the open, on the sidelines ... Not behind a locked bathroom door. To me, there's a big difference.
I tend to agree but I'm having trouble justifying it in my head.

Best way I can figure it is I'd have no problem if NE gave the refs underinflated balls hoping to slip them thru.  Yet, when they do it after inspection, it seems dirty. 
5/13/2015 10:15 PM
◂ Prev 1...17|18|19|20|21|22 Next ▸
11 of 12 footballs deflated.... Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.