Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 See my post above. If you think the refs are exacting, I don't know what to say. My guess is that they just pump 'em up, give 'em a squeeze to see if they feel ok, and let the teams sort it out. Then every single ref lied that Wells talked to, which were many of them, and especially the one guy who admitted he screws over the other teams and measures them all but sets them to whatever he wants and not the teams. They measure the balls. They used to co e right out of the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 That's not about air pressure. It's about rubbing the balls down before the game, or using balls that have already been worn in versus brand new balls right out of the box which still have a film to them. Nothing to do with air pressure. Like I said, more control over ball conditions. I'm assuming the air pressure was on their minds as well, just not a part of that particular discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Then every single ref lied that Wells talked to, which were many of them, and especially the one guy who admitted he screws over the other teams and measures them all but sets them to whatever he wants and not the teams. They measure the balls. They used to co e right out of the box. A) Refs have a self interest in portraying themselves in a favorable light, and B) if there are rogue refs out there who don't follow a team's guidelines (even just a couple of them), wouldn't that make QB inherently suspicious of the balls he gets given the inconsistency across the league and prior bad experiences with unasked-for PSI levels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 You can believe what you want to believe. No one is arguing that the standard didn't exist, so don't try to put words in my mouth. Clearly, if the texts are to believed, some of the balls teams end up with aren't to a qb's liking. Why is Rodgers inflating them after they've been handed to him? And why is Brady bitching about "overinflated" balls in the Jets game? Somehow, the balls were above the limit he liked by a lot (at least in his mind). Rodgers never said that. He puts more air into them before they measure them. There is nothing illegal about that. He never ever said he did it after the measurements were taken. He even complains that they let air out of his balls before the games, because they do. They measure them. And if it's over 13.5 they take some out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 See my post above. If you think the refs are exacting, I don't know what to say. My guess is that they just pump 'em up, give 'em a squeeze to see if they feel ok, and let the teams sort it out. They use a pressure gauge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 A) Refs have a self interest in portraying themselves in a favorable light, and B) if there are rogue refs out there who don't follow a team's guidelines (even just a couple of them), wouldn't that make QB inherently suspicious of the balls he gets given the inconsistency across the league and prior bad experiences with unasked-for PSI levels? The rogue ref was inside the rules. They do it as a courtesy to the teams. I don't think there is a definitive rule that the teams are allowed to dictate. There is a 12.5 range to 13.5. That's what the balls have to be. The refs help the teams that like them one way or another. It's part of their job to weigh every one. I would bet they do 95% of the games. If he didn't weigh the balls before the game why the hell would he take TWO gauges just in case one failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 A) Refs have a self interest in portraying themselves in a favorable light, and B) if there are rogue refs out there who don't follow a team's guidelines (even just a couple of them), wouldn't that make QB inherently suspicious of the balls he gets given the inconsistency across the league and prior bad experiences with unasked-for PSI levels? That's as good an excuse for cheating as any, I suppose... If he didn't weigh the balls before the game why the hell would he take TWO gauges just in case one failed. Because he's worried about making himself look good...duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 That's as good an excuse for cheating as any, I suppose... As I said above. There are not rogue refs. The refs do it as a courtesy to the teams that ask them to set it exactly at a certain psi between 12.5 and 13.5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 As I said above. There are not rogue refs. The refs do it as a courtesy to the teams that ask them to set it exactly at a certain psi between 12.5 and 13.5 My comment was more sarcastic...I agree that Dave Mcbride is grasping for straws in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 They use a pressure gauge... but even the two in question from that day arent consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 but even the two in question from that day arent consistent. So? They gauge the balls and then put them in play. Any complaints about pressure after that would fall solely on the refs. The issue is that Brady's ball boys deflated the balls again, after they had already been measured. At this point, you don't even need gauges. The rules were clearly broken. Now we're just making excuses for cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) My comment was more sarcastic...I agree that Dave Mcbride is grasping for straws in this case. I never said that the Pats didn't violate the rules. My point -- again -- is that it strikes me as highly plausible that Brady was unaware that balls were being deflated below a numerical limit because his personal gauge was "feel" -- i.e., "Does this feel like a 12.5, or does it feel pumped up more than that?" Obviously, I don't know for certain if that's how he operated, but if he does take this to court, than it's plausible to suspect that this is how it happened. We shall see. I've been saying all along that he'll take it to court, and KtD said early on (and more than once) that there was a zero percent chance he'd take this to court. We'll know soon enough who is right. Edited July 27, 2015 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 but even the two in question from that day arent consistent.That element of it was a real puzzlement, how they could have been .5 off each other. I wonder if it was a fluke, one was defective or off in some way? I'm not sure that has ever been determined. It's sort of funny to me that all of the Patriots apologists and arguments that they didn't or may not have cheated are based on the readings from the gauges. There were four possible outcomes because two gauges were used at two different times in the experiments in the Wells report. The Patriots supporters all use the most favorable outcome to them as the standard as if it were just fact. But it's only a 25% chance that is what happened and there is a huge reason to believe that wasn't the case. But it's also the exact same 25% chance that the gauges were in the least favorable advantage to the Patriots and that they cheated way more than they were even accused of. Even in the most favorable light, the 25%, they still clearly cheated. It's just not as much (and two of the twelve were two pounds under). I know a long time ago, for instance, that two different radar guns used in baseball gave two different results as far as fastballs, like 4-5 mph difference and I used that in court fighting a photo radar ticket and won. Ha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 That element of it was a real puzzlement, how they could have been .5 off each other. I wonder if it was a fluke, one was defective or off in some way? I'm not sure that has ever been determined. It's sort of funny to me that all of the Patriots apologists and arguments that they didn't or may not have cheated are based on the readings from the gauges. There were four possible outcomes because two gauges were used at two different times in the experiments in the Wells report. The Patriots supporters all use the most favorable outcome to them as the standard as if it were just fact. But it's only a 25% chance that is what happened and there is a huge reason to believe that wasn't the case. But it's also the exact same 25% chance that the gauges were in the least favorable advantage to the Patriots and that they cheated way more than they were even accused of. Even in the most favorable light, the 25%, they still clearly cheated. It's just not as much (and two of the twelve were two pounds under). I know a long time ago, for instance, that two different radar guns used in baseball gave two different results as far as fastballs, like 4-5 mph difference and I used that in court fighting a photo radar ticket and won. Ha. The gun at the Royals stadium has historically been notorious for producing overly high speed readings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I never said that the Pats didn't violate the rules. My point -- again -- is that it strikes me as highly plausible that Brady was unaware that balls were being deflated below a numerical limit because his personal gauge was "feel" -- i.e., "Does this feel like a 12.5, or does it feel pumped up more than that?" Obviously, I don't know for certain if that's how he operated, but if he does take this to court, than it's plausible to suspect that this is how it happened. We shall see. I've been saying all along that he'll take it to court, and KtD said early on (and more than once) that there was a zero percent chance he'd take this to court. We'll know soon enough who is right.I said there is zero percent chance he takes it to court where the whole issue is opened and Jastremski and McNally could be forced to testify under oath. I said he may take it to court on the basis of whether Goodell had authority to rule as he did with no chance that the real story is under question but I believe that has already been debunked and he wouldn't do well in court on that either. I also have always said it could be reduced to two games but that is if Goodell or the NFL caves, which I don't think they should do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 It's the opposite. With Wells/NFL, all he had to do was give them the related material. If he sues and is subpoenaed, absolutely everything is on the table... Yep. If he sues, then everyone else is going down with the ship, not just the NFL/owners. Agree, but I can't imagine any scenario where Brady would prefer to see his personal contents opened up to the NFL/Wells team for review and interpretation over a court system. He might as well simply give it to the National Enquirer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I never said that the Pats didn't violate the rules. My point -- again -- is that it strikes me as highly plausible that Brady was unaware that balls were being deflated below a numerical limit because his personal gauge was "feel" -- i.e., "Does this feel like a 12.5, or does it feel pumped up more than that?" Obviously, I don't know for certain if that's how he operated, but if he does take this to court, than it's plausible to suspect that this is how it happened. We shall see. I've been saying all along that he'll take it to court, and KtD said early on (and more than once) that there was a zero percent chance he'd take this to court. We'll know soon enough who is right. So, at whose request did the ball boys take the balls into the bathroom after the official check? Kraft or Bellichick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 So, at whose request did the ball boys take the balls into the bathroom after the official check? Kraft or Bellichick? Mother nature's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 So, at whose request did the ball boys take the balls into the bathroom after the official check? Kraft or Bellichick? Who knows? They may have done it on their own, operating under the general guideline of "Get it right for Tom." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 So? They gauge the balls and then put them in play. Any complaints about pressure after that would fall solely on the refs. The issue is that Brady's ball boys deflated the balls again, after they had already been measured. At this point, you don't even need gauges. The rules were clearly broken. Now we're just making excuses for cheating. some of you get stuck in this circular loop of non-productive discussion because you dont take the time to catch peoples takes before jumping in. ive said repeatedly that i think there was intentiaonal deflation. probably more than 90% of the people that want hang him higher for it. my point in replying to your post was towards the idea that the process is highly accurate and not just a bit of a "whatever happens happens" with regards to the ball pressure, not that they are innocent. but if theres not consistency in the process, not consistency in the gauges, then how does one argue that the (arbitrary) range is enforced with exacting measures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts