timtebow15 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Everyone is focused on the penalty but I am very curious about what happens when Brady returns. I believe strongly the deflated ball has helped Brady and has helped the Pats reduce their turnovers. My assumption is also that it has been going on for at least several seasons (I don't think they just came up with the nickname The Deflator for the playoffs). We will certainly find out as I expect, miraculously, the Pats turnover advantage to disappear which will provide a good indication of just how long this has been going on. More importantly, when Brady returns you know the ball pressure will not be to his liking for the rest of his career. I think there will be a psychological impact as well as a physical impact. I really don't think he'll be the quarterback he once was and we'll also get an idea of just how much his cheating has helped his stats over the past few years, especially as he has aged. Anyway, I expect the fact that they can no longer cheat in this way will have more impact then the penalties. Maybe this is just wishful thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17 Josh Allen Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 you bet and here are the facts to back it up Here is some research of why the Pats win more games. They win the turnover battle and they do it by deflating the ball to make it easier to hold onto and to grip. This team is just the poster child for the biggest cheats in sports history The real deal on fumbles according to Sharp: The league average from 2010 to 2014 was 50 plays per fumble. For indoor teams, the average was 55 plays per fumble. For outdoor teams, excluding the Patriots, the average was 46 plays per fumble. The Patriots averaged 73 plays per fumble, almost 60 percent more than outdoor teams and almost 50 percent more than the league average the past five years. Maybe the Patriots just target players who are particularly good at holding onto the ball? Its easy to think that during the offseason and in the draft room, Belichick and friends are scouting players who have a knack for not fumbling. However, Michael Salfino of the Wall Street Journal looked at Patriots players who, since 2010, have logged significant minutes on other teams to compare fumbles rates. His findings: Additionally, according to Stats, LLC, the six players who have played extensively for the Patriots and other teams in this span all fumbled far less frequently wearing the New England uniform. Including recovered fumbles, Danny Amendola, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Brandon LaFell and LeGarrette Blount have lost the ball eight times in 1,482 touches for the Patriots since 2010, or once every 185.3 times. For their other teams, they fumbled 22 times in 1,701 touches (once every 77.3). So it cant be merely personnel, right? For example, Green-Ellis didnt fumble once in 501 touches for the Patriots since 2010. However, during his next two years with the Cincinnati Bengals he fumbled five times in 524 touches. Likewise, Amendola hasnt fumbled once in 82 touches with the Patriots, yet had three fumbles in 162 touches with Ram since 2010. During the same time, Woodhead saw his plays-per-fumble decrease from 171 with the Patriots to just 86 with the Chargers. Blount fumbled every 51.8 plays with the Buccaneers and Steelers, but only every 73 plays with New England. Yet while Welker only lost the ball every 166 touches with the Patriots, he is still yet to fumble (in 122 touches so far) with the Broncos. And LaFell has actually seen his plays-per-fumble decrease to 76 with the Patriots, from 86.5 with the Panthers. While it isnt universal for every individual player, Salfinos larger finding still stands: in the past five years, players fumble significantly less on the Patriots than they do when playing for other teams. Since his initial report, Sharp wrote a supplemental post showing that from 2007-2014, individual Patriots players with more than 300 touches fumbled once every 107 touches, versus every 67 touches when playing for other teams. So it isnt strictly personnel. Could it be the coaching? Despite Stevan Ridley earning a reputation for being fumble-prone, the stats dont seem to show that he fumbles at a rate particularly higher than league averages. In fact, since 2010, only one team in the league had a better rate: The Atlanta Falcons, who play in a dome, fumbled only once every 80 plays. Besides the Patriots, no other team in the league broke 70 and no other outdoor team had a better rate than 55. Compared to the average fumble rate for the 31 other teams in the league, per touch Ridley actually has a better chance of holding on. That hasnt, however, stopped him from being benchedmultiple timesfor fumbling. Perhaps Belichick has particularly high standards for his players. And we know turnovers are a statistic that Belichick has focused on in the past. Its not very realistic that it is something he regularly drills in practice and emphasizes, even if it means benching his running back. Does this apparent strictness from the coach explain the Patriots collective tight grip on the football? Perhaps Belichick has just groomed his team into a statistical anomaly when it comes to fumble rate? Or perhaps something else has been in the works. As Sharp speculates, maybe theyve invented a revolutionary in-house way to protect the ball or they design plays that dont put players in the position to fumble. Or maybe its the ball. The Patriots have held the best plays per fumble rate since 2007. Sharp also points out this is the first year the Patriots started outperforming in wet weather games. After going 0-2 in 2006, New England has gone an unprecedented 14-1 in Tom Brady wet weather home games (compared to 51-9 in dry weather home games). According to ProFootballReference.com, from 2001 to 2006, Brady averaged 9.8 fumbles per season. From 2007 to 2014, his fumbles per season decreased to 5.3. Interestingly, one other thing changed the season prior to 2007: the rules. In 2006, Brady and Peyton Manning successfully lobbied the league to allow road team offenses to bring their own balls, breaking from the rule in which the home team provided all 24 balls. You may have heard of this rule change recently in the news again. Ultimately, the anomaly of the Patriots superior fumble avoidance doesnt prove anything, besides a distinct advantage on their opponents. But whether its coaching, play design or PSI, its certainly no coincidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) I don't think Brady will look any different as a result. He's 38 going on 39 and time always wins in the end, so there's that. But I'm not sure he's even the one driving this. I wouldn't be shocked if the failure to produce phone/text records is because it would have implicated the King of Cheat - Belichick. This is his kind of scheme.... look, fewer fumbles, more wins! I am the greatest! (And most arrogant.) Edit: I have the short version.... See points made above! haha Edited May 13, 2015 by Augie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 If you keep posting that article in full your going to get in trouble with the mods for copyright issues. Because that's against the rules. And I know how you feel about people that break the rules. So get a link and give a couple sentences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Father Time is undefeated. Only he and the Tax Man always win in the end. It took EVERYTHING the Patriots* had including everyt questionable trick and tactic AND some amazing luck AFTER they loaded up on mercenaries to get the job done last season. EVERY member of Seattle's secondary was hurt our out of the game AND they lost their best pass rusher who had been unblockable in the Super Bowl to a concussion. Then New England* started moving the ball late. It still took an all-time bonehead call/throw for them to survive. And that is after illegal formations and stupid ticky tack tricks VS Baltimore at home in the playoffs, and some good fortune not having to face Manning in the AFC Title Game (the Pats* actually have a LOSING record vs Manning led teams in the AFC Title Game, the biggest game Manning and Brady can play against each other). Manning's quad blew so they got the cupcake Colts, who cannot even give them a game. It's over, people. They let everyone on their team go because THEY know it's true. This year is going to be about Brady throwing 100 times a game trying to break records, and that won't end well for a guy pushing 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Section242 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 New England will beat Indy by 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Everyone is focused on the penalty but I am very curious about what happens when Brady returns. I believe strongly the deflated ball has helped Brady and has helped the Pats reduce their turnovers. My assumption is also that it has been going on for at least several seasons (I don't think they just came up with the nickname The Deflator for the playoffs). We will certainly find out as I expect, miraculously, the Pats turnover advantage to disappear which will provide a good indication of just how long this has been going on. More importantly, when Brady returns you know the ball pressure will not be to his liking for the rest of his career. I think there will be a psychological impact as well as a physical impact. I really don't think he'll be the quarterback he once was and we'll also get an idea of just how much his cheating has helped his stats over the past few years, especially as he has aged. Anyway, I expect the fact that they can no longer cheat in this way will have more impact then the penalties. Maybe this is just wishful thinking? Do we know that the Pats can't cheat that way anymore? Has there been new protocols put in place yet to help stop it happening in the future? I wouldn't be surprised if they go straight out and do it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Although I agree with No Saint, that was an interesting article. as far as the future for the Pats, it would be wishful thinking the Pats will not play as well with inflated balls. It just seems like a stretch. Will there maybe a slight increase in fumbles, possibly, and will Tom not play quite as terrific, but remember guys they inflated the balls in the second half against the Colts, and Brady held a clinic on the Indy defense. It would be quite interesting to see the Pats not win the AFC East this year after this suspension. It would certainly be a talking point on football channels towards the end of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 I think instead of having to give up draft choices and $1 meeeelion dollars, their punishment should have focused on the footballs. They should have been forced to play with footballs that were over inflated by the same amount that they have been under inflating them. As long as Brady is under center, the footballs should be 15 psi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 New England will beat Indy by 40. Isn't the game at Lucas Oil this year? If so, I'd take that bet--the Pats** won't have any home advantage (and whatever advantages (fair or foul) that entails for them). A rusty Brady might just get his clock cleaned there, but time will tell on that (and even when, if ever, he serves his suspension, as they may try to drag it out to a less meaty part of their schedule). I also wonder who is going to play CB for them, as they just about gutted their CB ranks this offseason. Combine that with losing Wilfork and not really adding much in FA or the draft (although they did draft a big plugger for the middle of the D at 32) and it may be an interesting year in Foxboro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ko12010 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Can you please provide a link? I'd like to read the article in full from the original website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts