NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I'd be pretty shocked if the NFL ran a sting operation on the Patriots the same night the NFL commissioner was partying with the owner of the Patriots at his house. unless you are arguing the ref/colts figured it out in real time without any pre-game heads up, then there was to a degree a sting here instead of the traditional "hey, cut it out before i have to start checking" that past commissioners seemed to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I'd be pretty shocked if the NFL ran a sting operation on the Patriots the same night the NFL commissioner was partying with the owner of the Patriots at his house. Did you just call Goodell Fredo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I can't make sense out of your #1. But have you ever held and NFL regulation football? They're hard as hell and slippery too. Deflate them a couple of pounds and it's like putting a handle on the ball. GREAT advantage to the ball carrier IMHO. GREAT. WRT #2 - who says "Lots of teams are doing it? I haven't heard that at all. I'm sure there's some skullduggery that goes on, but what we're discussing here is a systematic program to circumvent the rules. That points a dagger at the integrity of the League and the game itself. I have, and its not a great advantage. The exaggeration of the impact of the PSI is off the charts. If the PSI is a GREAT advantage, why does the NFL have such a loose regulation and enforcement of the one thing on the field 100% of the time, the ball? If it matters as much as being exaggerated, why are the balls in control of the team at all after the ref inspects them? Its pretty easy to just put them in bin on each teams sideline that is accessible by refs only if the danger of a PSI being lower or higher creates a "great" advantage. And if you haven't heard that a lot of teams are doing it, then you have your ears closed in a biased hatred to the Patriots. Aaron Rodgers inflates them harder than allowed to see if the refs catch it (which shows the refs aren't even consistently checking the balls with a PSI gauge every game if they can sometimes slip by) and many QBs past and present have talked about doing all kinds of things to the footballs, even bribing ball boys do stuff in the Super Bowl. The reality is, the public knows NOTHING at this point. Nothing has been released by the NFL. Everything has been one "leaked" story after another, each one contradicting the one before. Already debunked are the false reports about D'Qwell taking it to the sideline because it felt funny (he stated he never thought the ball was weird or complained about it, he took it as a souvenir only), the myth that the Ravens started this and tipped the Colts off and complained to the league (Jim Harbaugh publicly stated that at no point in any game have they ever been suspicious of the footballs and it wasnt true), and now the report that it was 11 of 12 balls that were 2 PSI lower is being contradicted by a report that only one ball was that low and the rest were just slightly off. This has gotten so out of hand, and that falls soley on Goodell who's handling of this has allowed the media and false rumors to run rampant because it creates ratings. On 2 different XM sports talk radio shows alone yesterday, they had a caller complain about how they are tired of the story...both hosts on 2 different shows said a similar response that they can't change the subject if they wanted because all the lines were full and have been for the whole show when thats never the case...and all the callers are calling in about this topic. The media is fueling this in the silence of the NFL. Its so bad now, that even if the NFL finds no fault, people are going to scream cover up. Its a shame this great game, the Super Bowl, is flooded with this because the NFL dropped the ball again. Goodells job should be in jeopardy in my opinion. If they find evidence, drop the hammer...but I don't think there will ever be any evidence to prove or disprove anything at this point because the NFL let this inflate to ridiculous heights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) I have, and its not a great advantage. The exaggeration of the impact of the PSI is off the charts. If the PSI is a GREAT advantage, why does the NFL have such a loose regulation and enforcement of the one thing on the field 100% of the time, the ball? If it matters as much as being exaggerated, why are the balls in control of the team at all after the ref inspects them? Its pretty easy to just put them in bin on each teams sideline that is accessible by refs only if the danger of a PSI being lower or higher creates a "great" advantage. This is a terrible argument. It provides zero facts, pure speculation(unless you've played in the NFL?), and suggests that the PSI of a ball can't give large advantage because the league isn't more strict about teams having access to the balls, which has NO basis whatsoever. Edited January 26, 2015 by TheBillsWillRiseAgain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 This is a terrible argument. It provides zero facts, pure speculation(unless you've played in the NFL?), and suggests that the PSI of a ball can't give large advantage because the league isn't more strict about teams having access to the balls, which has NO basis whatsoever. as opposed to the counter arguments widely accepted for about 9 out of 10 in the thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) What "counter-arguments?" Edited January 26, 2015 by TheBillsWillRiseAgain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 What "counter-arguments?" it must be serious or there wouldnt be a rule no one else is doing it as no one else was caught its a HUGE advantage etc..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) There are several charts and graphs that have been posted suggesting that deflated balls gave the Patriots a large advantage in both bad weather passing and not fumbling the balls and they're based on real numbers. I didn't see any charts of graphs suggesting otherwise. We've also heard plenty of anecdotal evidence from ex-players of the NFL explaining that it's a big advantage. I haven't heard otherwise. And we've heard from the manufacturer of the ball itself state that the only way for a ball to lose that much PSI in that amount of time is putting it in a freezer or using a pump needle to deflate it. Every single piece of real evidence points to the Patriots having done this intentionally for several years at least, to them benefiting from it, and to them finally getting caught for it. Edited January 26, 2015 by TheBillsWillRiseAgain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) There are several charts and graphs that have been posted suggesting that deflated balls gave the Patriots a large advantage in both bad weather passing and not fumbling the balls and they're based on real numbers. I didn't see any charts of graphs suggesting otherwise. We've also heard plenty of anecdotal evidence from ex-players of the NFL explaining that it's a big advantage. I haven't heard otherwise. Every single piece of real evidence points to the Patriots having done this for several years at least, to them benefiting from it, and to them finally getting caught for it. 1) there are several charts that the pats fumble less. in no way do they show that this is the CAUSE, simply that a lower rate of fumbles are present. Ive also seen a variety of stats absolutely butchered in this argument. you are the one making the jump without foundation. 2) im sorry but i still dont believe a crying mark brunell more than other sources (perhaps leinart if you want the other side). Both sides exist. We have heard one team likes them more firm. we have heard players say its a non story. and have seen plenty of non-professionals say they cant even tell the balls apart, while posters here say "its like having a handle to hold onto." go back to the first day or two of this and how many posters were calling it a league conspiracy as the balls would be visually saggy. one guy even argued he could tell the ball was flying different. Edited January 26, 2015 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Flutie Band Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 CHARTS AND GRAPHS YOU GUYS THE MAN HAS SEEN CHARTS AND GRAPHS CASE CLOSED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 There are several charts and graphs that have been posted suggesting that deflated balls gave the Patriots a large advantage in both bad weather passing and not fumbling the balls and they're based on real numbers. I didn't see any charts of graphs suggesting otherwise. We've also heard plenty of anecdotal evidence from ex-players of the NFL explaining that it's a big advantage. I haven't heard otherwise. And we've heard from the manufacturer of the ball itself state that the only way for a ball to lose that much PSI in that amount of time is putting it in a freezer or using a pump needle to deflate it. Every single piece of real evidence points to the Patriots having done this intentionally for several years at least, to them benefiting from it, and to them finally getting caught for it. This simply isn't true. The Pats fumble at a high-end-of-normal rate, which can be explained by the fact they give up few sacks and are actually good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 This simply isn't true. The Pats fumble at a high-end-of-normal rate, which can be explained by the fact they give up few sacks and are actually good. but you CANNOT deny that they get sacked less because of their dangerous deflated ball running game. it all comes back to the ball, man..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 1) there are several charts that the pats fumble less. in no way do they show that this is the CAUSE, simply that a lower rate of fumbles are present. Ive also seen a variety of stats absolutely butchered in this argument. you are the one making the jump without foundation. 2) im sorry but i still dont believe a crying mark brunell more than other sources (perhaps leinart if you want the other side). Both sides exist. We have heard one team likes them more firm. we have heard players say its a non story. and have seen plenty of non-professionals say they cant even tell the balls apart, while posters here say "its like having a handle to hold onto" I think I'll stick with the direction that all the glaring evidence points rather than ignore it and desperately try to find any explanation that isn't the obvious answer that they cheated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) I think I'll stick with the direction that all the glaring evidence points rather than ignore it and desperately try to find any explanation that isn't the obvious answer that they cheated. we can side step again if you want... but i havent denied its possible - in fact said it was likely that they manipulated the footballs, but would like to hear the actual story before digging in on later proven false leaks, media frenzy, and terrible stats. i also think that its effect and how rare it is are probably both being overstated, but havent seen great info on this either. so maybe you are the one with the mind made up and ignoring half the discussion. Edited January 26, 2015 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleed Bills Blue Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Expect the Pats to be more careful, and to keep cheating. Yes, they can't stop, they are cereal cheaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Maybe, but probably not. we can side step again if you want... but i havent denied its possible - in fact said it was likely that they manipulated the footballs. but that its effect and how rare it is are probably both being overstated.so maybe you are the one with the mind made up and ignoring half the discussion. Maybe but probably not. The "other half of the discussion" sounds like a few people trying(and failing) to dig for any valid excuse for the Patriots they can think of. The people arguing against you don't really need to dig for explanations because all the evidence suggests they're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Maybe, but probably not. Maybe but probably not. The "other half of the discussion" sounds like a few people trying(and failing) to dig for any valid excuse for the Patriots they can think of. The people arguing against you don't really need to dig for explanations because all the evidence suggests they're right. unfortunately, its gotten a bit muddy so a lot of people are confusing "evidence" and "facts" with "unnamed leaks that have contradictions" and "claims that sound crazy when you stop to think about them" what we know: at some point during the game the refs pulled the pats footballs because they were underinflated. as i said, i havent denied the pats did anything to the balls here. simply questioned what was actually found (as we have several different reports as to the number of balls that failed and how badly they failed) what the effect would be (as we have seen people argue everything from a visually saggy ball that would make you cry if you knew how big a deal it was too no advantage at all) and how wide spread it is (as we have seen college and pro examples and some say everyone does it while others say no one) Edited January 26, 2015 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 It's an absolute joke the relationship Kraft has with Goodell, it's not right to the rest of the league, to the players or the fans of the sport. so we are back to "the nfl orchestrated a sting operation to catch them in the act publicly so they could ignore it" angle again. you dont see any inconsistency in that? none? im not saying ignore the whole story or nothing happened, but.... feel free to atleast stick to arguments that make sense, and there has been some interesting commentary on each side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 The weather/atmosphere argument is completely off the table unless you believe the Wilson Sports company is conspiring against the Patriots. So what other explanation is there to even talk about? The Patriots intentionally deflated their balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts