Patriots locker room attendant implicated in Deflate gate

[MattM]

 

And one further note:

 

With this whole fumbles argument, all the "statistical analysis" I'm seeing is that on a season-by-season basis the Patriots rate of fumbling became a serious statistical outlier after the away team got to control their own footballs in 2007. (E.g. http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-new-england-patriots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007).

 

That's a very shallow analysis. The hypothesis is that the Patriots benefited from being in control of their own footballs during away games. Comparing seasonal fumble statistics doesn't prove that. If anyone wants to demonstrate there was a true benefit to the Pats using their own balls, compare the rates of fumbling between home and away games before 2007, then compare then after. If home vs. away fumbles are very different before 2007, then very similar afterwards, THEN there's some confirmation that the statistical outlier is more than just random dumb luck.

On that last point, I think that's dealt with in at least the Slate piece on this topic by the fact that before 2007 everyone played with the same ball so there was no incentive to deflate the ball, meaning no reason for there to be a differential for home and away.

[Alphadawg7]

Where are you getting that Cassel fumbles less than Brady? Cassel fumbled 7 times in NE when Brady was out. Brady fumbled 1 time in the 2 years surrounding it...ONCE.

 

2007 - Brady sacked 21 times, 1 fumble.

2008 - Cassell sacked 47 times, 7 fumbles

2009 - Brady sacked 16 times, 0 fumbles.

 

Brady was sacked 37 times in TWO years, 1 fumble behind the same line that Cassel got sacked 47 times and with 7 fumbles in one year.

 

So what are you talking about?

[Rob's House]

The NFL certainly got their hands on this alleged surveilance tape pretty quickly... Where was that hussle after the Ray Rice incident went down?

One had something to do with the actual product the NFL produces. The other was a private act whose only connection to the NFL is it was perpetrated by an employee of one NFL ffranchise. A mentally impaired monkey coming off a 3 day bender could see the difference.

 

Too bad self-righteous douche bags peddling to a public with a median IQ of 100 run most major media outlets, otherwise we wouldn't have had to listen to morons across America sharing their emotionally charged yet intellectually vacant outrage at the NFL for something it had nothing to do with.

[BuffaloHokie13]

On that last point, I think that's dealt with in at least the Slate piece on this topic by the fact that before 2007 everyone played with the same ball so there was no incentive to deflate the ball, meaning no reason for there to be a differential for home and away.

 

The away teams provide their own footballs, but the home team supplies the ball attendant as far as I know. So probably no deflating on the road

[BillnutinHouston]

 

Ahhh, so you are one of those guys who makes things up are you...weird, his career stats of him playing 4 years not with the Pats...2 in Miami and 2 in Denver....suggest otherwise.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5941/wes-welker

 

Lets see, as a WR he has ZERO...again ZERO fumbles outside of NE. Not one fumble as a WR in Denver or Miami in 4 years. He had SIX with NE.

 

Not sure where you went to school, but at my school Zero is not more than 6 and its certainly not "twice as often". So how can he fumble twice as often away from NE when he's never fumbled a single time away from NE in his entire career? lol

 

On a side note: He has 11 fumbles as a returner outside NE and another 5 as a returner with NE. However, returners don't return balls that his QB uses, they returns the ball of the other team and its a K ball. So they have no relevance in this discussion as he would not have been returning a "deflated" ball as it was the opposing teams ball and their K ball on top of that.

 

So actually, Welker is significant evidence that the Pats are better at teaching ball control, because Welker cut his fumbles down big time in the return game once he got to NE.

I mentioned Welker because you did. Welker was included in a study of six Pats** fumbling stats done by the Wall Street Journal. Collectively, he, Amendola, Green-Ellis, Woodhead, LaFell and Blount "have lost the ball 8 times in 1,482 touches for the Pats** since 2010, or once every 185.3 times. For their other teams, they fumbled 22 times in 1,701 touches (once every 77.3).

 

Care to explain?

 

WSJ reporting of Pats** curious non-QB fumble stats

 

Edited January 28, 2015 by BillnutinHouston

[Sojourner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVOyf3Dc_WY

[TheBillsWillRiseAgain]

I mentioned Welker because you did. Welker was included in a study of six Pats** fumbling stats done by the Wall Street Journal. Collectively, he, Amendola, Green-Ellis, Woodhead, LaFell and Blount "have lost the ball 8 times in 1,482 touches for the Pats** since 2010, or once every 185.3 times. For their other teams, they fumbled 22 times in 1,701 touches (once every 77.3).

 

Care to explain?

 

Www.wsj.com/articles/patriots-always-keep-a-tight-grip-on-the-ball-14220548

Other coaches don't care if their players fumble. Only Bellichick.

[JDHILL]

One had something to do with the actual product the NFL produces. The other was a private act whose only connection to the NFL is it was perpetrated by an employee of one NFL ffranchise. A mentally impaired monkey coming off a 3 day bender could see the difference.

 

Too bad self-righteous douche bags peddling to a public with a median IQ of 100 run most major media outlets, otherwise we wouldn't have had to listen to morons across America sharing their emotionally charged yet intellectually vacant outrage at the NFL for something it had nothing to do with.

It's how the NFL handles the issues that is the problem. These are both issues that impact credibility albeit in different circumstances. That same monkey coming off the bender should be able to see that.

[Rob's House]

It's how the NFL handles the issues that is the problem. These are both issues that impact credibility albeit in different circumstances. That same monkey coming off the bender should be able to see that.

They have about as much in common as cold beer and Chuck Liddell. They can both !@#$ you up.

[GG]

 

Ahhh, so you are one of those guys who makes things up are you...weird, his career stats of him playing 4 years not with the Pats...2 in Miami and 2 in Denver....suggest otherwise.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5941/wes-welker

 

Lets see, as a WR he has ZERO...again ZERO fumbles outside of NE. Not one fumble as a WR in Denver or Miami in 4 years. He had SIX with NE.

 

Not sure where you went to school, but at my school Zero is not more than 6 and its certainly not "twice as often". So how can he fumble twice as often away from NE when he's never fumbled a single time away from NE in his entire career? lol

 

On a side note: He has 11 fumbles as a returner outside NE and another 5 as a returner with NE. However, returners don't return balls that his QB uses, they returns the ball of the other team and its a K ball. So they have no relevance in this discussion as he would not have been returning a "deflated" ball as it was the opposing teams ball and their K ball on top of that.

 

So actually, Welker is significant evidence that the Pats are better at teaching ball control, because Welker cut his fumbles down big time in the return game once he got to NE.

 

 

Wondering where ESPN is getting its Welker stats from, because pro football reference has totally different set of fumbleitis

 

And the whole thing about Brady being the best operator in the pocket is also up for a big debate, considering the allegations of Pats* tampering with the helmet and radio transmissions.

[Alphadawg7]

 

 

Wondering where ESPN is getting its Welker stats from, because pro football reference has totally different set of fumbleitis

 

And the whole thing about Brady being the best operator in the pocket is also up for a big debate, considering the allegations of Pats* tampering with the helmet and radio transmissions.

 

Probably from the NFL who also have him with zero fumbles with Mia and Den and 7 with NE. I don't know what weird site that is, but every major news site, including NFL.com has him at 6 career fumbles receiving and all were in NE, none with Den or Mia. Here is the NFLs website...same stats.

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/weswelker/2505790/careerstats

 

Also, as I originally pointed out, Welker has 18 additional career fumbles as a kick returner and punt returner. Most of which occurred in Mia during his first 3 years in the league. Those fumbles have no impact on the inflation of the ball because on a kick or punt return, the ball being received is not his own teams ball, its the ball from the opposing team and its their K ball. And therefore are 100% irrelevent in this discussion.

 

And in fact, he vastly reduced his fumbling on kick/punt returns with Patriots...which further illustrates he got better as a player at fumbling by being in NE and being coached on how to secure the ball. It could not be from deflated footballs because those footballs belong to the OTHER team and are K balls.

I mentioned Welker because you did. Welker was included in a study of six Pats** fumbling stats done by the Wall Street Journal. Collectively, he, Amendola, Green-Ellis, Woodhead, LaFell and Blount "have lost the ball 8 times in 1,482 touches for the Pats** since 2010, or once every 185.3 times. For their other teams, they fumbled 22 times in 1,701 touches (once every 77.3).

 

Care to explain?

 

WSJ reporting of Pats** curious non-QB fumble stats

 

 

No offense, but I don't care what a writer incorrectly wrote...facts are facts, what do you want me to explain? The article is clearly wrong.

 

He has 7 fumbles with Pats on offense, and Zero with Den and Mia. Case closed, click and count for yourself. This isn't even debatable, its 100% fact.

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/weswelker/2505790/careerstats

 

UPDATE: He actually has SEVEN fumbles with the Pats and NONE with DEN and MIA...forgot the one rushing fumble in NE. 7 fumbles with NE, 0 with DEN and Mia.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Alphadawg7

[Dibs]

Where are you getting that Cassel fumbles less than Brady? Cassel fumbled 7 times in NE when Brady was out. Brady fumbled 1 time in the 2 years surrounding it...ONCE.

 

2007 - Brady sacked 21 times, 1 fumble.

2008 - Cassell sacked 47 times, 7 fumbles

2009 - Brady sacked 16 times, 0 fumbles.

 

Brady was sacked 37 times in TWO years, 1 fumble behind the same line that Cassel got sacked 47 times and with 7 fumbles in one year.

 

So what are you talking about?

 

I was using QB runs plus sacks......but if you want to simply use sacks(and there is a good argument that runs are misleading as many of them result in QB slides)....here they are:

 

Source:

NFL.com player stats Cassel(http://www.nfl.com/p...562/careerstats)

NFL.com player stats Brady(http://www.nfl.com/p...211/careerstats)

 

Matt Cassel fumble rates pre-2007 with Patriots and post Patriots(2009+)

135 sacks

40 fumbles (1 in 3.8...29.6%)

15 fumbles lost (1 in 9...11.1%)

 

Matt Cassel fumble rates with Patriots(2007+2008):

47 sacks

8 fumbles (1 in 5.9...17%)

4 fumbles lost (1 in 11.8...8.5%)

 

 

Tom Brady fumble rate pre-2007

182 sacks

59 fumbles (1 in 3.1...32.4%)

25 fumbles lost (1 in 7.3...13.7%)

 

Tom Brady fumble rates 2007+

182 sacks

36 fumbles (1 in 5.1...19.8%)

15 fumbles lost (1 in 12.1...8.2%)

 

 

Again Cassel had a mainly a lower fumble percent per sack than Brady.......but that really isn't the important point.

 

The important point is that both Brady's and Cassel's fumble rate was drastically reduced since 2007(on Patriots).

How do you explain this?

 

 

 

For interest sake, here is P.Manning's equivalent stats:

Source:

NFL.com player stats Cassel(http://www.nfl.com/player/peytonmanning/2501863/careerstats)

 

Manning fumble rate pre-2007

170 sacks

45 fumbles (1 in 3.8...26.5%)

16 fumbles lost (1 in 10.6...9.4%)

 

Manning fumble rates 2007+

117 sacks

29 fumbles (1 in 4...24.8%)

12 fumbles lost (1 in 9.8...10.3%)

 

 

As one can see, Mannings fumble percentages remained relatively constant comparing pre-2007 with post-2006. Insignificant decrease in fumbles post-2006, but an insignificant increase in fumbles lost post-2006.

 

Both Brady and Cassel had significant decreases in fumbles and fumbles lost post-2006. Again, how do you explain this?

[Alphadawg7]

 

I was using QB runs plus sacks......but if you want to simply use sacks(and there is a good argument that runs are misleading as many of them result in QB slides)....here they are:

 

Source:

NFL.com player stats Cassel(http://www.nfl.com/p...562/careerstats)

NFL.com player stats Brady(http://www.nfl.com/p...211/careerstats)

 

Matt Cassel fumble rates pre-2007 with Patriots and post Patriots(2009+)

135 sacks

40 fumbles (1 in 3.8...29.6%)

15 fumbles lost (1 in 9...11.1%)

 

Matt Cassel fumble rates with Patriots(2007+2008):

47 sacks

8 fumbles (1 in 5.9...17%)

4 fumbles lost (1 in 11.8...8.5%)

 

 

Tom Brady fumble rate pre-2007

182 sacks

59 fumbles (1 in 3.1...32.4%)

25 fumbles lost (1 in 7.3...13.7%)

 

Tom Brady fumble rates 2007+

182 sacks

36 fumbles (1 in 5.1...19.8%)

15 fumbles lost (1 in 12.1...8.2%)

 

 

Again Cassel had a mainly a lower fumble percent per sack than Brady.......but that really isn't the important point.

 

The important point is that both Brady's and Cassel's fumble rate was drastically reduced since 2007(on Patriots).

How do you explain this?

 

 

 

For interest sake, here is P.Manning's equivalent stats:

Source:

NFL.com player stats Cassel(http://www.nfl.com/player/peytonmanning/2501863/careerstats)

 

Manning fumble rate pre-2007

170 sacks

45 fumbles (1 in 3.8...26.5%)

16 fumbles lost (1 in 10.6...9.4%)

 

Manning fumble rates 2007+

117 sacks

29 fumbles (1 in 4...24.8%)

12 fumbles lost (1 in 9.8...10.3%)

 

 

As one can see, Mannings fumble percentages remained relatively constant comparing pre-2007 with post-2006. Insignificant decrease in fumbles post-2006, but an insignificant increase in fumbles lost post-2006.

 

Both Brady and Cassel had significant decreases in fumbles and fumbles lost post-2006. Again, how do you explain this?

 

 

Come on, lets not start using skewed facts. Second your stats are wrong...you are assuming sacks caused the fumbles, but they are grossly inaccurate. For instance, Cassels 14 fumbles in KC in 2009, only 5 were from sacks...9 were from rushing fumbles. You counted them all as fumbles from sacks, but 64% of them came from rushing the football instead of sacks in just that year alone.

 

Cassel played one year for the Pats, he sat the rest of the time. With the Pats he fumbled 7 times and was sacked 47 times. 5 of those fumbles were from sacks, 2 from rushing.

 

Brady fumbled once in 2 years surrounding the one year that Cassel played. Brady didn't fumble, Cassel does.

 

And lets look at Cassel, in the very next year as the starter in KC, Cassel fumbled 5 times on sacks, and 9 times on runs for a total of 14. Clearly, he has ball security issues...7 with the pats and 14 in his second year in the NFL and second year of football since High School. He lost an Elite offense, an Elite coach, and went to an inferior team...do you think maybe thats why he fumbled more?

 

Then in his next year in KC he cut his fumbles down to only THREE total. So he fumbled 7 times in NE, then 14 the next year in KC, then only 3 in his 2nd year in KC. So did KC start deflating balls then too, because that was less than half the fumbles he had in NE?

 

So your stats are already incorrect as you counted them all together and created a stat against sacks even though sacks didn't cause many of Cassels fumbles. Then you over look the one insane year where Cassel fumbled 9 times just rushing the football.

 

Facts are...1 year in NE as starter 7 fumbles...he only ever fumbled more than this once in any season in his career. So how can he fumble less in NE?

Edited January 28, 2015 by Alphadawg7

[Dibs]

....

So how can you tell me he fumbles less in NE when he had 7, his second most in his career the one year he was there?...

....

What are you talking about dude...I don't get what you are trying to do with this.

 

......

 

 

 

Yes, it seems apparent that you are not following what I am saying.

 

The number of fumbles is not as important as the rate one fumbles. If one only gets sacked 10 times but fumbles 5 times, this would be a worse fumble rate than someone getting sacked 100 times and fumbling 30 times.

 

I assume you follow what YPA(Yards Per Attempt) means. This is the same concept but it is Fumbles Per Sack.

 

 

As the time in question is the pre-2007/post-2006, one can compare the percentage times that Patriot QBs fumbled per sack.

 

To make it simpler to digest I will base things on every 100 sacks....

 

For every 100 sacks,

Pre-2007

Tom Brady fumbled(coughed up the ball) 32 times.

 

For every 100 sacks,

Post-2006

Tom Brady fumbled(coughed up the ball) 20 times.

 

For every 100 sacks,

Pre-2007(and post Patriots)

Matt Cassel fumbled(coughed up the ball) 30 times.

 

For every 100 sacks,

Post-2006(with Patriots)

Mat Cassel fumbled(coughed up the ball) 17 times.

 

Both Brady and Cassel had a much lower fumble rate per sack while on the Patriots after the 2006 season.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Dibs

[Alphadawg7]

 

Yes, it seems apparent that you are not following what I am saying.

 

The number of fumbles is not as important as the rate one fumbles. If one only gets sacked 10 times but fumbles 5 times, this would be a worse fumble rate than someone getting sacked 100 times and fumbling 30 times.

 

I assume you follow what YPA(Yards Per Attempt) means. This is the same concept but it is Fumbles Per Sack.

 

 

As the time in question is the pre-2007/post-2006, one can compare the percentage times that Patriot QBs fumbled per sack.

 

To make it simpler to digest I will base things on every 100 sacks....

 

For every 100 sacks,

Pre-2007

Tom Brady fumbled(coughed up the ball) 32 times.

 

For every 100 sacks,

Post-2006

Tom Brady fumbled(coughed up the ball) 20 times.

 

For every 100 sacks,

Pre-2007(and post Patriots)

Matt Cassel fumbled(coughed up the ball) 30 times.

 

For every 100 sacks,

Post-2006(with Patriots)

Mat Cassel fumbled(coughed up the ball) 17 times.

 

Both Brady and Cassel had a much lower fumble rate per sack while on the Patriots after the 2006 season.

 

Again, you are ignoring so many variables though, that all matter.

 

1. Sample size for NE is 1 year as he only got playing time one season.

2. His number of fumbles from sacks of 5 in NE is tied for the most fumbles he had from sacks in any of year of his career.

3. No one person fumbles the same each year. He had 14 in one year in KC alone followed by 3 in KC the next year.

4. The team he ran in NE was coming off the greatest offensive season in the history of football. The team he joined was clearly a massive down grade as an offensive unit.

5. The variance is minor in your sack rates.

6. Cassel clearly didn't fumble less in NE, he fumbled 7 times. Thats not a small number.

 

To say, using one season in NE compared to 7 seasons on other teams is not in any way an accurate barometer of sample size. And the NE season he still had a bad year fumbling of 7 fumbles. To now draw the conclusion that he is helped in NE to fumble less often is a false assumption and conclusion. And to also disregards the other significant factors above further dilutes the conclusion.

 

I get what you are doing, and I respect the work you put in...I am just saying the data is flawed for all the reasons I said above and misleading. As far as Brady goes, the offense he commanded in 2007 was light years better than offense he had in 2006 or any year prior to that. It was at the time the most dominant offense in all time and went on to be a top offense for years to come, even under Cassel it was still pretty good. Ignoring the massive increase in talent, production, and efficiency is a mistake.

[Dibs]

 

......As far as Brady goes, the offense he commanded in 2007 was light years better than offense he had in 2006 or any year prior to that....

 

Though it is a simple Fumbles Per Sack stat, I am happy to ignore Cassel for all of the reasons you gave.

 

Brady however is a different story. What difference do the surrounding talent make on a Fumbles Per Sacks statistic? Do the better receivers help Brady hang onto the ball better when he gets hit? Do the RBs? The Defense? The OL?

 

It is a simple Fumbles Per Sack stat.

Pre-2007, Brady fumbled once every 3 times he was sacked.

Post-2006, Brady fumbled once every 5 times he was sacked.

 

Why are you so desperate in trying to disbelieve this?

[papazoid]

I know, but it supported your argument better than Pioli left....so i thought i would help ya out!

thanks...i needed some help...

 

here's some more ammo

 

Patriots say there’s nothing suspicious about their ball security:

 

Not according to the players on the Patriots, who instead say that they simply go through so many ball control drills that they have become the best team in the league at holding onto the ball.

 

“I can definitely tell that the coaching and the drills that we do within the spring and the offseason and camp and OTAs have really paid off for a lot of guys,” Patriots receiver Danny Amendola said. “We take a lot of drills that we do within the week, within practice, and take them to the field. We do a lot of drills that really benefit that.”

 

Patriots running back LeGarrette Blount has fumbled three times in his 219 career touches as a Patriot (a little less frequently than his 10 fumbles in 518 career touches when playing with the Buccaneers and Steelers), and he says that in New England the coaches always make a big deal about ball security.

 

“We put a heavy emphasis on keeping the football,” Blount said. “We practice holding the football, we have the defense punch at the football a lot extra more than probably most teams do. We do everything to emphasis ball security because like I said, you can’t win the game without the ball.”

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/27/patriots-say-theres-nothing-suspicious-about-their-ball-security/

Edited January 28, 2015 by papazoid

[TheBillsWillRiseAgain]

Pretty sure every coach in the league places a huge emphasis on ball security. There's only so much emphasis and practice you can do in ball security before doing that much more doesn't make a difference. We're talking about one of the most basic principles of football that players learn when they're in peewee football. Do the patriots invent some secret way to hold a ball or something?

[papazoid]

Pretty sure every coach in the league places a huge emphasis on ball security. There's only so much emphasis and practice you can do in ball security before doing that much more doesn't make a difference. We're talking about one of the most basic principles of football that players learn when they're in peewee football. Do the patriots invent some secret way to hold a ball or something?

and yet we have players coming from other teams who say the patriots do more in this area.

 

guess you will just dismiss anything that doesn't fit your agenda.

[TheBillsWillRiseAgain]

Have you ever in your life heard a player say that his current team doesn't practice ball security enough? What the hell do you expect them to say when a reporter asks about fumbling?