01-19-2015, 11:38 AM
"To the press alone, checkered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression." ~ James Madison
Did the Pats take a page out of Lane Kiffin's playbook?
"To the press alone, checkered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression." ~ James Madison
"To the press alone, checkered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression." ~ James Madison
01-19-2015, 11:52 AM
I thought this was in reference to the 4-linemen sets. Anyway, I'd be pretty surprised if anything came of this, why bother trying to get a marginal edge in the passing game when:
1) You're already winning by a lot.
2) You're doing most of your damage running the ball.
It just doesn't make sense and if a ball was found to be out-of-spec it seems way more likely that it was just defective somehow.
1) You're already winning by a lot.
2) You're doing most of your damage running the ball.
It just doesn't make sense and if a ball was found to be out-of-spec it seems way more likely that it was just defective somehow.
I thought this was in reference to the 4-linemen sets. Anyway, I'd be pretty surprised if anything came of this, why bother trying to get a marginal edge in the passing game when:
1) You're already winning by a lot.
2) You're doing most of your damage running the ball.
It just doesn't make sense and if a ball was found to be out-of-spec it seems way more likely that it was just defective somehow.
1) You're already winning by a lot.
2) You're doing most of your damage running the ball.
It just doesn't make sense and if a ball was found to be out-of-spec it seems way more likely that it was just defective somehow.
01-19-2015, 02:44 PM
I think the logic is that the Colts rely on their passing game more than the Patriots, so deflating the ball would have confered a larger benefit on the Patriots. Plus, it is not like Bill Belichick doesn't have a history of playing fast and loose with the rules (remember Spygate?). That being said, it would be pretty brazen for him to have tried to get away with that.
BC
BC
I think the logic is that the Colts rely on their passing game more than the Patriots, so deflating the ball would have confered a larger benefit on the Patriots. Plus, it is not like Bill Belichick doesn't have a history of playing fast and loose with the rules (remember Spygate?). That being said, it would be pretty brazen for him to have tried to get away with that.
BC
BC
01-19-2015, 04:39 PM
(01-19-2015, 02:33 PM)garvin link Wrote:As the story notes, the game balls had to be turned over to the officials two and a half hours before kickoff. So New England couldn't possibly have known that it would be winning, or winning by a giant margin, or that the running game would be the key factor. If the footballs were deliberately underinflated, it was a strategic decision taken before the game, not an ad-hoc devised on the sideline.
It seems to me it's going to be hard to prove this was deliberate rather than accidental. ("Hey, our tire gauge wasn't working right!") But I am also pretty surprised that the NFL would announce this. So, who knows?
I believe the rules are such that the officials are in possession of the balls right up until the start of the game. At that point the only people who could mess with them are basically ballboys, and you'd be doing it with all those cameras around. So, yeah, they could've screwed with them then, but, again, why? The gameplan called for a heavy dose of running, so it really seems like a marginal gain for the potential cost (though I'm not sure exactly how you get caught doing it intentionally). I'm really skeptical that this happened.
Anyway, since we've heard literally nothing about why anyone suspects the Pats' balls were deflated, we don't really know when the supposed transgression occurred. Because of that I was assuming it stemmed from the 3rd quarter mishap where the officials replaced the ball, which the broadcast team said was because it was a kicking ball, but we don't really know.
(01-19-2015, 02:33 PM)garvin link Wrote:As the story notes, the game balls had to be turned over to the officials two and a half hours before kickoff. So New England couldn't possibly have known that it would be winning, or winning by a giant margin, or that the running game would be the key factor. If the footballs were deliberately underinflated, it was a strategic decision taken before the game, not an ad-hoc devised on the sideline.
It seems to me it's going to be hard to prove this was deliberate rather than accidental. ("Hey, our tire gauge wasn't working right!") But I am also pretty surprised that the NFL would announce this. So, who knows?
I believe the rules are such that the officials are in possession of the balls right up until the start of the game. At that point the only people who could mess with them are basically ballboys, and you'd be doing it with all those cameras around. So, yeah, they could've screwed with them then, but, again, why? The gameplan called for a heavy dose of running, so it really seems like a marginal gain for the potential cost (though I'm not sure exactly how you get caught doing it intentionally). I'm really skeptical that this happened.
Anyway, since we've heard literally nothing about why anyone suspects the Pats' balls were deflated, we don't really know when the supposed transgression occurred. Because of that I was assuming it stemmed from the 3rd quarter mishap where the officials replaced the ball, which the broadcast team said was because it was a kicking ball, but we don't really know.
01-19-2015, 04:43 PM
(01-19-2015, 02:44 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:I think the logic is that the Colts rely on their passing game more than the Patriots, so deflating the ball would have confered a larger benefit on the Patriots. Plus, it is not like Bill Belichick doesn't have a history of playing fast and loose with the rules (remember Spygate?). That being said, it would be pretty brazen for him to have tried to get away with that.
BC
What? First, each team has their own balls, so the benefit would only be conferred to the Patriots. Second, taking some pressure out helps the passing game (makes the ball easier to catch, apparently), so if your premise were true the conclusion would be backward.
Also, spygate is one of those things that's seriously overblown. The Patriots were just taping stuff from the wrong location. Everyone acts like it was some kind of serious espionage shit going on, but it really wasn't. The worst you can say about Belichick is that he pushes the boundaries of rules, but deflating balls isn't that at, it's clearly just against the rules. And to do it in this game, but not the Baltimore game? It just makes no sense. (I suppose you could say that they did it there too, but then why wasn't it caught? It's not like the defense had many more opportunities to handle the Pats' gameballs in this game.)
(01-19-2015, 02:44 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:I think the logic is that the Colts rely on their passing game more than the Patriots, so deflating the ball would have confered a larger benefit on the Patriots. Plus, it is not like Bill Belichick doesn't have a history of playing fast and loose with the rules (remember Spygate?). That being said, it would be pretty brazen for him to have tried to get away with that.
BC
What? First, each team has their own balls, so the benefit would only be conferred to the Patriots. Second, taking some pressure out helps the passing game (makes the ball easier to catch, apparently), so if your premise were true the conclusion would be backward.
Also, spygate is one of those things that's seriously overblown. The Patriots were just taping stuff from the wrong location. Everyone acts like it was some kind of serious espionage shit going on, but it really wasn't. The worst you can say about Belichick is that he pushes the boundaries of rules, but deflating balls isn't that at, it's clearly just against the rules. And to do it in this game, but not the Baltimore game? It just makes no sense. (I suppose you could say that they did it there too, but then why wasn't it caught? It's not like the defense had many more opportunities to handle the Pats' gameballs in this game.)
01-19-2015, 05:35 PM
(01-19-2015, 04:43 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=11574.msg111186#msg111186 date=1421703895]
I think the logic is that the Colts rely on their passing game more than the Patriots, so deflating the ball would have confered a larger benefit on the Patriots. Plus, it is not like Bill Belichick doesn't have a history of playing fast and loose with the rules (remember Spygate?). That being said, it would be pretty brazen for him to have tried to get away with that.
BC
What? First, each team has their own balls, so the benefit would only be conferred to the Patriots. Second, taking some pressure out helps the passing game (makes the ball easier to catch, apparently), so if your premise were true the conclusion would be backward.
[/quote]
Like you BC, I thought that under inflation would benefit the running team and hurt the passing team. The USA Today article says the opposite. It does seem to me that under inflating the balls could especially hurt the deep passing game, but I'm really not sure of that.Â
really, Stupac, each team is responsible for their own balls? What an odd system for the visiting team that has to cart their balls with them then, presumably inflate them once they land, given the way elevation would, I assume, mess with the pressure.
With all the money floating around the league I can't believe that they can't just hire an additional person for each officiating crew to just check equipment.
(01-19-2015, 04:43 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=11574.msg111186#msg111186 date=1421703895]
I think the logic is that the Colts rely on their passing game more than the Patriots, so deflating the ball would have confered a larger benefit on the Patriots. Plus, it is not like Bill Belichick doesn't have a history of playing fast and loose with the rules (remember Spygate?). That being said, it would be pretty brazen for him to have tried to get away with that.
BC
What? First, each team has their own balls, so the benefit would only be conferred to the Patriots. Second, taking some pressure out helps the passing game (makes the ball easier to catch, apparently), so if your premise were true the conclusion would be backward.
[/quote]
Like you BC, I thought that under inflation would benefit the running team and hurt the passing team. The USA Today article says the opposite. It does seem to me that under inflating the balls could especially hurt the deep passing game, but I'm really not sure of that.Â
really, Stupac, each team is responsible for their own balls? What an odd system for the visiting team that has to cart their balls with them then, presumably inflate them once they land, given the way elevation would, I assume, mess with the pressure.
With all the money floating around the league I can't believe that they can't just hire an additional person for each officiating crew to just check equipment.
01-19-2015, 05:56 PM
(01-19-2015, 05:35 PM)socalstanfan1 link Wrote:Like you BC, I thought that under inflation would benefit the running team and hurt the passing team. The USA Today article says the opposite. It does seem to me that under inflating the balls could especially hurt the deep passing game, but I'm really not sure of that.Â
really, Stupac, each team is responsible for their own balls? What an odd system for the visiting team that has to cart their balls with them then, presumably inflate them once they land, given the way elevation would, I assume, mess with the pressure.
With all the money floating around the league I can't believe that they can't just hire an additional person for each officiating crew to just check equipment.
Everything I've read says it helps the passing game by making the ball easier to catch. It would hinder the kicking game by making the ball not travel as far, but I don't think that would affect throws much (could work either way, by being lighter the ball would travel farther, but also be more susceptible to wind).
And yeah, apparently the home team provides some number of balls (I think 36), the refs check that they conform, then they're split between home and away. It's a pretty weird system, I have no idea why the refs aren't in control of the balls the whole time if this is an issue.
(01-19-2015, 05:35 PM)socalstanfan1 link Wrote:Like you BC, I thought that under inflation would benefit the running team and hurt the passing team. The USA Today article says the opposite. It does seem to me that under inflating the balls could especially hurt the deep passing game, but I'm really not sure of that.Â
really, Stupac, each team is responsible for their own balls? What an odd system for the visiting team that has to cart their balls with them then, presumably inflate them once they land, given the way elevation would, I assume, mess with the pressure.
With all the money floating around the league I can't believe that they can't just hire an additional person for each officiating crew to just check equipment.
Everything I've read says it helps the passing game by making the ball easier to catch. It would hinder the kicking game by making the ball not travel as far, but I don't think that would affect throws much (could work either way, by being lighter the ball would travel farther, but also be more susceptible to wind).
And yeah, apparently the home team provides some number of balls (I think 36), the refs check that they conform, then they're split between home and away. It's a pretty weird system, I have no idea why the refs aren't in control of the balls the whole time if this is an issue.
01-20-2015, 09:58 PM
(01-20-2015, 09:32 PM)garvin link Wrote:Well, ESPN says that the NFL says that the Patriots' footballs were underfinflated.
http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/122...nship-game
Underfinflated? I bet even CowboyIndian can't make a pun out of that.
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
(01-20-2015, 09:32 PM)garvin link Wrote:Well, ESPN says that the NFL says that the Patriots' footballs were underfinflated.
http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/122...nship-game
Underfinflated? I bet even CowboyIndian can't make a pun out of that.
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
01-20-2015, 10:03 PM
(01-20-2015, 09:32 PM)garvin link Wrote:Well, ESPN says that the NFL says that the Patriots' footballs were underfinflated.
http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/122...nship-game
Tweet of the day:
https://twitter.com/geoff_calkins/status...0930594820
Unbelievable that the Patriots would do it. And for it to happen in 11/12 balls, suggests one of two things... either they had a calibration problem with their pump, or it was deliberate.
BC
(01-20-2015, 09:32 PM)garvin link Wrote:Well, ESPN says that the NFL says that the Patriots' footballs were underfinflated.
http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/122...nship-game
Tweet of the day:
https://twitter.com/geoff_calkins/status...0930594820
Unbelievable that the Patriots would do it. And for it to happen in 11/12 balls, suggests one of two things... either they had a calibration problem with their pump, or it was deliberate.
BC
01-21-2015, 12:07 AM
(01-20-2015, 09:58 PM)CornFed link Wrote:[quote author=garvin link=topic=11574.msg111313#msg111313 date=1421814778]
Well, ESPN says that the NFL says that the Patriots' footballs were underfinflated.
http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/122...nship-game
Underfinflated? I bet even CowboyIndian can't make a pun out of that.
[/quote]
Something about the ventral appendages of a pufferfish...? Uh, never mind.
(01-20-2015, 09:58 PM)CornFed link Wrote:[quote author=garvin link=topic=11574.msg111313#msg111313 date=1421814778]
Well, ESPN says that the NFL says that the Patriots' footballs were underfinflated.
http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/122...nship-game
Underfinflated? I bet even CowboyIndian can't make a pun out of that.
[/quote]
Something about the ventral appendages of a pufferfish...? Uh, never mind.
01-21-2015, 05:47 AM
Word around Boston is that EVERY team does it but people are tired of losing to the Pats and that's the only reason this is news. They're mostly mourning the loss of any chance BB will unseat Walsh as the GOAT with additional tarnishing of his rep.
We're the balls in the Ravens game tampered? Would the Colts have hosted the AFC championship if not?
We're the balls in the Ravens game tampered? Would the Colts have hosted the AFC championship if not?
Word around Boston is that EVERY team does it but people are tired of losing to the Pats and that's the only reason this is news. They're mostly mourning the loss of any chance BB will unseat Walsh as the GOAT with additional tarnishing of his rep.
We're the balls in the Ravens game tampered? Would the Colts have hosted the AFC championship if not?
We're the balls in the Ravens game tampered? Would the Colts have hosted the AFC championship if not?
01-21-2015, 05:57 AM
A generation of moral, relativistic cheats and liars are being groomed across New England. I overheard a bunch of teens complainin how the cheating didn't matter because it didn't change the outcome.
01-21-2015, 06:18 AM
Belichick is such a turd. I wonder what people like him and Nick Saban would become if head ball coach wasn't an option.
01-21-2015, 07:30 AM
As an Ohio ex-patriot ( ;) sic) and now New Englander, I was going to let my kids be Patriots fans to spare them the misery of being Bengals fans. Spygate and now this. This is too much. Our family will not cheer for the Patriots as long as Belicheat is the coach.
"If you cheat to win, then you've already lost."
Bo Schembechler
As a Michigan Man, Brady should know this.
Go Seachickens aka Stanford NFL Franchise B!
"If you cheat to win, then you've already lost."
Bo Schembechler
As a Michigan Man, Brady should know this.
Go Seachickens aka Stanford NFL Franchise B!
As an Ohio ex-patriot ( ;) sic) and now New Englander, I was going to let my kids be Patriots fans to spare them the misery of being Bengals fans. Spygate and now this. This is too much. Our family will not cheer for the Patriots as long as Belicheat is the coach.
"If you cheat to win, then you've already lost."
Bo Schembechler
As a Michigan Man, Brady should know this.
Go Seachickens aka Stanford NFL Franchise B!
"If you cheat to win, then you've already lost."
Bo Schembechler
As a Michigan Man, Brady should know this.
Go Seachickens aka Stanford NFL Franchise B!
01-21-2015, 09:33 AM
I'm still holding out a vague hope it was unintentional because it's just so stupid if it wasn't. It's really annoying too because any sober, unbiased analysis would show that it just didn't influence any outcomes (neither this nor the "spygate" non-scandal), but it doesn't matter because:
1) People don't need excuses to hate successful franchises;
2) Sober, unbiased analyses are utterly impossible in sports;
3) THEN WHY ***** DO IT???
It's very frustrating. I feel roughly similar to how I'd feel if I found out Shaw was contacting recruits during the dead period or something. Like, okay, I get you want to get every advantage possible, but this doesn't give you one and carries blowback potential, so why do it?
Frustrating.
1) People don't need excuses to hate successful franchises;
2) Sober, unbiased analyses are utterly impossible in sports;
3) THEN WHY ***** DO IT???
It's very frustrating. I feel roughly similar to how I'd feel if I found out Shaw was contacting recruits during the dead period or something. Like, okay, I get you want to get every advantage possible, but this doesn't give you one and carries blowback potential, so why do it?
Frustrating.
I'm still holding out a vague hope it was unintentional because it's just so stupid if it wasn't. It's really annoying too because any sober, unbiased analysis would show that it just didn't influence any outcomes (neither this nor the "spygate" non-scandal), but it doesn't matter because:
1) People don't need excuses to hate successful franchises;
2) Sober, unbiased analyses are utterly impossible in sports;
3) THEN WHY ***** DO IT???
It's very frustrating. I feel roughly similar to how I'd feel if I found out Shaw was contacting recruits during the dead period or something. Like, okay, I get you want to get every advantage possible, but this doesn't give you one and carries blowback potential, so why do it?
Frustrating.
1) People don't need excuses to hate successful franchises;
2) Sober, unbiased analyses are utterly impossible in sports;
3) THEN WHY ***** DO IT???
It's very frustrating. I feel roughly similar to how I'd feel if I found out Shaw was contacting recruits during the dead period or something. Like, okay, I get you want to get every advantage possible, but this doesn't give you one and carries blowback potential, so why do it?
Frustrating.
01-21-2015, 10:15 AM
According to former Buccaneer QB Brad Johnson, he paid for deflation of all 100 balls used in Super Bowl XXXVII.
http://www.sbnation.com/2015/1/21/786560...eflategate
http://www.sbnation.com/2015/1/21/786560...eflategate
"To the press alone, checkered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression." ~ James Madison
According to former Buccaneer QB Brad Johnson, he paid for deflation of all 100 balls used in Super Bowl XXXVII.
http://www.sbnation.com/2015/1/21/786560...eflategate
http://www.sbnation.com/2015/1/21/786560...eflategate
"To the press alone, checkered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression." ~ James Madison
01-21-2015, 12:23 PM
(01-21-2015, 07:30 AM)Publius link Wrote:As an Ohio ex-patriot ( ;) sic) and now New Englander, I was going to let my kids be Patriots fans to spare them the misery of being Bengals fans. Spygate and now this. This is too much. Our family will not cheer for the Patriots as long as Belicheat is the coach.
"If you cheat to win, then you've already lost."
Bo Schembechler
As a Michigan Man, Brady should know this.
Go Seachickens aka Stanford NFL Franchise B!
You do remember who is coaching the Seahawks, don't you? Belicheat versus cheaty petey. Yuck.
BC
(01-21-2015, 07:30 AM)Publius link Wrote:As an Ohio ex-patriot ( ;) sic) and now New Englander, I was going to let my kids be Patriots fans to spare them the misery of being Bengals fans. Spygate and now this. This is too much. Our family will not cheer for the Patriots as long as Belicheat is the coach.
"If you cheat to win, then you've already lost."
Bo Schembechler
As a Michigan Man, Brady should know this.
Go Seachickens aka Stanford NFL Franchise B!
You do remember who is coaching the Seahawks, don't you? Belicheat versus cheaty petey. Yuck.
BC
01-21-2015, 01:43 PM
(01-21-2015, 10:52 AM)garvin link Wrote:Here's the most complete account yet. It seems some of my earlier posts were in error -- the teams apparently do use only the balls they supply, and there is no mention of the home team having to supply an extra dozen balls.
Seems like the simplest solution to this would be to mix the balls up so a team couldn't predict which one it would be using on offense or defense.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/0...story.html
Apparently, the home team also is responsible for 12 backup balls, which is where you got your number from.
BC
(01-21-2015, 10:52 AM)garvin link Wrote:Here's the most complete account yet. It seems some of my earlier posts were in error -- the teams apparently do use only the balls they supply, and there is no mention of the home team having to supply an extra dozen balls.
Seems like the simplest solution to this would be to mix the balls up so a team couldn't predict which one it would be using on offense or defense.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/0...story.html
Apparently, the home team also is responsible for 12 backup balls, which is where you got your number from.
BC
For YEARS there have been rumors that NFL teams played with the inflation level of balls used by place kickers. (Or, alternatively, filled them with helium.) The Mythbusters TV show even did an episode to experiment with the effectiveness of such strategies. Belichik and Brady took it one level further. I specifically mention Brady because if this is intentional - and it certainly looks like it is - there is NO WAY a team doesn't consult with the guy who handles the ball every offensive down.
So .... How big of a deal is this? I personally can't work up too much anger over a team throwing and catching a slightly under inflated ball. However, I'm rolling my eyes that the team caught is once again the Pats. We all know a guy who is always scheming for an edge, however small.Â
Brady and Belichik are THAT guy.
So .... How big of a deal is this? I personally can't work up too much anger over a team throwing and catching a slightly under inflated ball. However, I'm rolling my eyes that the team caught is once again the Pats. We all know a guy who is always scheming for an edge, however small.Â
Brady and Belichik are THAT guy.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2015, 03:07 PM by Leftcoast.)
For YEARS there have been rumors that NFL teams played with the inflation level of balls used by place kickers. (Or, alternatively, filled them with helium.) The Mythbusters TV show even did an episode to experiment with the effectiveness of such strategies. Belichik and Brady took it one level further. I specifically mention Brady because if this is intentional - and it certainly looks like it is - there is NO WAY a team doesn't consult with the guy who handles the ball every offensive down.
So .... How big of a deal is this? I personally can't work up too much anger over a team throwing and catching a slightly under inflated ball. However, I'm rolling my eyes that the team caught is once again the Pats. We all know a guy who is always scheming for an edge, however small.Â
Brady and Belichik are THAT guy.
So .... How big of a deal is this? I personally can't work up too much anger over a team throwing and catching a slightly under inflated ball. However, I'm rolling my eyes that the team caught is once again the Pats. We all know a guy who is always scheming for an edge, however small.Â
Brady and Belichik are THAT guy.
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
01-21-2015, 03:08 PM
P.S. I wonder if the sole ball that was not under inflated was the ball used for place kicking?
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
P.S. I wonder if the sole ball that was not under inflated was the ball used for place kicking?
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »