Patriots being investigated after Colts game (3 Viewers)

[Bucky86]

Pats fans. Wow.

 

[rjv]

No, I'm saying that there's no way a player knows whether coaching instructions come from legal or illegal taping.

Malcolm Butler said he knew exactly what play was coming, and it appears to be coaching instructions from legal taping. How would he ever know whether coaching instructions came from illegal taping? Same thing with Brady.

Tom is not stupid. When the OC talks to him on his headset and says the defense is going to run a fire zone blitz we need to run this protection and play, I am pretty sure he knows where this information came from.

BINGO!!!!!!! Perfect example. Pats fans please except your beloved team are not perfect.

 

[Donnybrook]

No, I'm saying that there's no way a player knows whether coaching instructions come from legal or illegal taping.

Malcolm Butler said he knew exactly what play was coming, and it appears to be coaching instructions from legal taping. How would he ever know whether coaching instructions came from illegal taping? Same thing with Brady.

Tom is not stupid. When the OC talks to him on his headset and says the defense is going to run a fire zone blitz we need to run this protection and play, I am pretty sure he knows where this information came from.

How would Tom know whether his OC knew this from legal tape study or studying illegal tapes? Unless Tom personally saw a tape that was obviously illegal.

I guess my point is, the NFL investigated this and punished Belichick. No fines/suspension for Tom: the NFL clearly concluded there was no evidence of Tom cheating.

Maybe he did and the NFL didn't catch him. But that is all speculation, and claiming that Spygate is proof of Tom's prior cheating is making a big assumption.

Since Belichick took the punishment on behalf of the team, it doesn't mean no one else on the team was involved. I am not sure if anyone could actually be so unaware on how stealing signals could help an offense and especially a QB. (Good job winding me up) Just glad the league introduced the defensive radio headset to counteract this.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Call your mom instead of obsessing over the Patriots on a Sunday morning….put away the hate and show your mom/wife/daughter some love!

 

[JohnnyU]

Call your mom instead of obsessing over the Patriots on a Sunday morning….put away the hate and show your mom/wife/daughter some love!

My mom hates the Patriots too, so we can share that today. Oh wait a minute, my mom died in December 2013. I bet she still hates the Patriots.

 

[massraider]

My mom's a Pats fan.

Win/Win

 

[Anarchy99]

My mom's a Pats fan.

Win/Win

I will resist the urge to say that your mom kept calling out "Oh Tom! Oh Tom!" last night.

 

[AB in DC]

Here's how it really went down. After the Jets game:

JJ: You were right, Tom, those balls were at 16.

Brady: What the f---. You're in charge of those balls. What the hell did you do?

JJ: It was the refs. They put way too much air in them.

Brady: Don't ever let that happen again. You know how I like those balls. Put them at 12.5 and tell those f---ing refs to leave them the f--- alone.

JJ: That f---ing primadonna is ripping me about those balls again

McNally: F--- Tom.

JJ: Tell me about. Listen, do me a favor, keep your eyes on those refs when they're doing the balls. Don't let them blow 'em up too big.

McNally: F--- Tom. F-- the refs.

JJ: I know. Don't let them mess with the balls. If they try to screw us again, deflate them yourself if you have to. I'm not letting Tom yell me again because some ####### refs can't do their job.

McNally: F--- Tom

JJ: Here, I'll get you a new needle.

McNally: You're the needle,

Then at the AFC Championship Game:

McNally: Jesus, this place is a zoo. F---,, I can't see if the refs is testing them right. And I know I saw one of those f---ers put some air in one of them. F---ing old man. I better let some air out just in case.

 

[The General]

Pats fans. Wow.

Honestly there only seems to be a few delusional ones.

 

[Tool]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

UPDATE 1:25 p.m. ET: As to Anderson’s recollection regarding the gauge used to set the PSI levels before kickoff, his “best recollection” is that he used the gauge with the logo, which generates higher numbers. But he conceded that it’s “certainly possible” he used the other gauge, and the Wells report concludes that he did.

So the referees best recollection is that he used the higher gauge for the initial readings, but the Wells report concludes that he used the other one.

 

[massraider]

Pats fans. Wow.

Honestly there only seems to be a few delusional ones.

100%.

I know a LOT of Pats fans, being a Ma$$whole my self. There are a lot of them that are silent on this. Of COURSE you only hear from the ones that make noise, and they are the ones that are going to be the most staunch defenders.

I mean, there are a lot of Pats fans here, and really, it's only on or two that are in here, fighting the good fight. Most of the posts here after the report are from salty haters like myself.

 

[Run It Up]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

UPDATE 1:25 p.m. ET: As to Anderson’s recollection regarding the gauge used to set the PSI levels before kickoff, his “best recollection” is that he used the gauge with the logo, which generates higher numbers. But he conceded that it’s “certainly possible” he used the other gauge, and the Wells report concludes that he did.

So the referees best recollection is that he used the higher gauge for the initial readings, but the Wells report concludes that he used the other one.

The wells report makes a lot of assumptions. This is only one of them.

Whatever was most convenient for the narrative.

 

[12punch]

No, I'm saying that there's no way a player knows whether coaching instructions come from legal or illegal taping.

Malcolm Butler said he knew exactly what play was coming, and it appears to be coaching instructions from legal taping. How would he ever know whether coaching instructions came from illegal taping? Same thing with Brady.

Tom is not stupid. When the OC talks to him on his headset and says the defense is going to run a fire zone blitz we need to run this protection and play, I am pretty sure he knows where this information came from.

BINGO!!!!!!! Perfect example. Pats fans please except your beloved team are not perfect.

like yor engrish

 

[12punch]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

UPDATE 1:25 p.m. ET: As to Anderson’s recollection regarding the gauge used to set the PSI levels before kickoff, his “best recollection” is that he used the gauge with the logo, which generates higher numbers. But he conceded that it’s “certainly possible” he used the other gauge, and the Wells report concludes that he did.

So the referees best recollection is that he used the higher gauge for the initial readings, but the Wells report concludes that he used the other one.

but it's an ***OFFICIAL REPORT***!!

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

May 10, 2015: the day Mike Florio pretended to have heard of the ideal gas law.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

While Brady may have called twiddle dee and twiddle dumb after the incident, we have no idea what they discussed.

No idea? None at all?

Be honest. You and I both know that there's about a 95% chance that those phone calls were about getting their story straight. Do we know that with 100% certainty? No. Maybe they were just talking about snow or Game of Thrones or something. But let's not be stupid and pretend that we really just have absolutely no idea of what those calls could possibly have been about.

Salty Haters will assume that anything ambiguous is proof of guilt by the Patriots.

a) The scientific data in the Wells report cannot confirm tampering.

"But it’s also important to remember that the league has no indisputable evidence that those footballs started their night’s work at 12.5 PSI, because inexplicably no record of pre-game measurements were made even though the Colts clearly had made the NFL aware of their ball deflation concerns about New England the day before the game. The scientific consultants to the Wells report found “no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the Patriots halftime (football inflation) measurements,’’ but it was also reported by those same consultants “that the data alone did not provide a basis for them to determine with absolute certainty whether there was or was not tampering.’’"

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/06/deflategate-new-england-patriots-tom-brady-wells-report

Salty Hater response: "Look at the texts instead, they prove everything!"

b) Even the texts do not say whether deflation was pre- or post-ref inspection. But the texts complain about the refs overinflating to 16 PSI, which could never have happened if deflation was post-inspection. Somehow the Patriots guys deflated post-ref inspection, yet the balls ended up at 16 PSI by the refs? Does not compute.

Salty Hater response: "The Patriots have a pattern of cheating! Of course it was post-inspection deflation."

c) Yes, the old "pattern of cheating" argument. Belichick was punished for Spygate, but Brady was not involved there. So that's 1 prior instance of breaking the rules by Belichick, and 0 by Brady. Now the phone calls where there is no proof of what was discussed, are more proof of Brady's guilt? Brady's pattern of cheating, where he had 0 prior instances of breaking the rules?

And had they recorded the measurements by writing them down apologist would argue they could have written anything down. And had they video taped the process apologist would argue the tape was from another time, or had been doctored. There is no quanta of proof for those who will not see or think. The refs have a very specific memory of the matter, and every reason to have that specific memory. Brady, and the Patriots organization have every reason to lie. That the scenario played out exactly as rumors and allegations suggested it would is in fact some evidence to the fair-minded. You are not among those folks.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Brady's agent's argent is that Tom gave his side of what happened and none of his interview was referenced in the report. Everything he said and his explanation was conviently ignored, and the only reference to him was his refusal to cooperate and hand over his phone.

That's kind of huge. And it goes back to my original question: Was this an investigation? Or a prosecution. Different intents, different methods, different critters.

Like hiring that "Results Are Us" lab

Brady's agent's argent is that Tom gave his side of what happened and none of his interview was referenced in the report. Everything he said and his explanation was conviently ignored, and the only reference to him was his refusal to cooperate and hand over his phone.

That's kind of huge. And it goes back to my original question: Was this an investigation? Or a prosecution. Different intents, different methods, different critters.

Like hiring that "Results Are Us" lab.

Interesting take. Not because I find it even slightly plausible, but because it is just so interesting to see how Pats fans are responding to this.

My question for you with regard to this theory is simply "why?". Why on earth would the NFL want to intentionally place doubt on not only one of the best franchises in the history of their product, but their current champion, and arguably the GOAT that their brand has produced? What purpose does that serve to improve their brand? Why would they want to see a guy who should have been the face of the NFL on the sidelines in a nationally televised kickoff of the 2015 season? Why would they want people talking about cheating, deceiving, and sullying a legacy instead of celebrating one of the best teams in players in the history of their game?

If anything, a logical person would suspect the exact opposite. That they would sweep it as far under the proverbial rug as they possibly can. If the NFL had it's way, I suspect that Wells woudl have come back with a report stating that without a doubt, Tom Brady had nothing to do with this. Put away your asterisk's and go back to worshipping the god of the NFL.

Why would they want this, as you seem to be insinuating? Enlighten me.

The NFL is not a monolithic entity, there are lots of high level people inside the NFL (like Mike Kensil) who are biased against the Patriots, and lots of other NFL franchises (Ravens, Colts, etc.) that hate the Patriots. Those people put pressure on the league to investigate. Plus, once the media starts running with some stories, that puts additional momentum into an investigation.

No idea why they hired that "Results Are Us" lab. They could have chosen another lab that seemed more neutral.

The lab is well respected. Their results are widely accepted by Courts who vet these foundational matters thoroughly. Yes they have detractors, paid mouthpieces for persons hurt by the truth of their results. Courts have weighed those spurious arguments many times, in greater depth than you will ever do, and have rejected them. This has been covered. You refuse to accept this. You refuse to accept many things. You are not remotely realistic in so doing.

 

[12punch]

Any who try to excuse the behavior of a cheater by impugning others, or trying to sow doubt with false arguments are persons of low character indeed.

perfect

 

[biju]

I say don't suspend Brady at all.

Instead, ban him from the HOF along with Belichick. Make their legacy be one where people 100 years from now ask "why aren't they in?" and someone else says "well, they were cheaters".

 

[Run It Up]

 

[IHEARTFF]

This isn't a trial. They don't have to prove anything. Probability is high that TB called 2 guys 'he had never heard of' multiple times days after the story broke about them all cheating together to get their story straight.

Jesus Christ I wish one of you parrots would actually pick up the report and read the damn thing.

He said he didn't know Mcnally... not Jestrimski. After deflate gate blew up he texted Jestrimski... but only after Jestrimski texted him. Then they had a 20 min conversation over the phone, then talked at work the next day. The Wells report goes into no detail whatsoever what they said to have discussed in that call or later at work.

Either way, there's no proof Brady knew Mcnally on a personal level. This is clear to anyone who actually read the report. Anything Brady said to Mcnally was through Jestrimski.

Do you really believe Tom Brady doesn't know Jim McNally?

Do you really believe that 2 guys who are supposed to handle the ball inflation levels for Tom F'ing Brady just went off the deep end and cheated on their own?

Do you really believe Tom Brady wouldn't notice if the ball was way underinflated?

 

[Run It Up]

This isn't a trial. They don't have to prove anything. Probability is high that TB called 2 guys 'he had never heard of' multiple times days after the story broke about them all cheating together to get their story straight.

Jesus Christ I wish one of you parrots would actually pick up the report and read the damn thing.

He said he didn't know Mcnally... not Jestrimski. After deflate gate blew up he texted Jestrimski... but only after Jestrimski texted him. Then they had a 20 min conversation over the phone, then talked at work the next day. The Wells report goes into no detail whatsoever what they said to have discussed in that call or later at work.

Either way, there's no proof Brady knew Mcnally on a personal level. This is clear to anyone who actually read the report. Anything Brady said to Mcnally was through Jestrimski.

Do you really believe Tom Brady doesn't know Jim McNally?

Do you really believe that 2 guys who are supposed to handle the ball inflation levels for Tom F'ing Brady just went off the deep end and cheated on their own?

Do you really believe Tom Brady wouldn't notice if the ball was way underinflated?

Does it matter? I mean I know it doesn't, very few have even attempted to apply logic, reason or objectivity to this.

I think its entirely plausible he didn't know McNally.

And, you're wrong about Jestrimski, McNally is one of the individuals responsible for preparing balls, Jestrimski is just an equipment manager, McNally's boss more or less. I think its entirely plausible McNally acted on his own. I think its entirely plausible and likely that Walt Anderson didn't do his ####### job.

I think its entirely plausible the ball felt normal enough during the game.

 

[IHEARTFF]

This isn't a trial. They don't have to prove anything. Probability is high that TB called 2 guys 'he had never heard of' multiple times days after the story broke about them all cheating together to get their story straight.

Jesus Christ I wish one of you parrots would actually pick up the report and read the damn thing.

He said he didn't know Mcnally... not Jestrimski. After deflate gate blew up he texted Jestrimski... but only after Jestrimski texted him. Then they had a 20 min conversation over the phone, then talked at work the next day. The Wells report goes into no detail whatsoever what they said to have discussed in that call or later at work.

Either way, there's no proof Brady knew Mcnally on a personal level. This is clear to anyone who actually read the report. Anything Brady said to Mcnally was through Jestrimski.

Do you really believe Tom Brady doesn't know Jim McNally?

Do you really believe that 2 guys who are supposed to handle the ball inflation levels for Tom F'ing Brady just went off the deep end and cheated on their own?

Do you really believe Tom Brady wouldn't notice if the ball was way underinflated?

Does it matter? I mean I know it doesn't, very few have even attempted to apply logic, reason or objectivity to this.

I think its entirely plausible he didn't know McNally.

And, you're wrong about Jestrimski, McNally is one of the individuals responsible for preparing balls, Jestrimski is just an equipment manager, McNally's boss more or less. I think its entirely plausible McNally acted on his own. I think its entirely plausible and likely that Walt Anderson didn't do his ####### job.

I think its entirely plausible the ball felt normal enough during the game.

That seems a rather unlikely chain of events, but I guess anything is possible. Wells report seems to agree that that is unlikely as well.

 

[espnespn]

While Brady may have called twiddle dee and twiddle dumb after the incident, we have no idea what they discussed.

No idea? None at all?

Be honest. You and I both know that there's about a 95% chance that those phone calls were about getting their story straight. Do we know that with 100% certainty? No. Maybe they were just talking about snow or Game of Thrones or something. But let's not be stupid and pretend that we really just have absolutely no idea of what those calls could possibly have been about.

Salty Haters will assume that anything ambiguous is proof of guilt by the Patriots.

a) The scientific data in the Wells report cannot confirm tampering.

"But it’s also important to remember that the league has no indisputable evidence that those footballs started their night’s work at 12.5 PSI, because inexplicably no record of pre-game measurements were made even though the Colts clearly had made the NFL aware of their ball deflation concerns about New England the day before the game. The scientific consultants to the Wells report found “no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the Patriots halftime (football inflation) measurements,’’ but it was also reported by those same consultants “that the data alone did not provide a basis for them to determine with absolute certainty whether there was or was not tampering.’’"

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/06/deflategate-new-england-patriots-tom-brady-wells-report

Salty Hater response: "Look at the texts instead, they prove everything!"

b) Even the texts do not say whether deflation was pre- or post-ref inspection. But the texts complain about the refs overinflating to 16 PSI, which could never have happened if deflation was post-inspection. Somehow the Patriots guys deflated post-ref inspection, yet the balls ended up at 16 PSI by the refs? Does not compute.

Salty Hater response: "The Patriots have a pattern of cheating! Of course it was post-inspection deflation."

c) Yes, the old "pattern of cheating" argument. Belichick was punished for Spygate, but Brady was not involved there. So that's 1 prior instance of breaking the rules by Belichick, and 0 by Brady. Now the phone calls where there is no proof of what was discussed, are more proof of Brady's guilt? Brady's pattern of cheating, where he had 0 prior instances of breaking the rules?

And had they recorded the measurements by writing them down apologist would argue they could have written anything down. And had they video taped the process apologist would argue the tape was from another time, or had been doctored. There is no quanta of proof for those who will not see or think. The refs have a very specific memory of the matter, and every reason to have that specific memory. Brady, and the Patriots organization have every reason to lie. That the scenario played out exactly as rumors and allegations suggested it would is in fact some evidence to the fair-minded. You are not among those folks.

Um, I believe the CNNSI article quotes from the Wells Report itself. Just because you disagree with it, doesn't make it so.

Here's Page 228 of the Wells Report, under the Conclusions section. You seem to be much surer of what happened, than what the report actually says. Maybe you should look in the mirror, and see whether you are as fair-minded as you think.

"In sum, the data did not provide a basis for us to determine with absolute certainty whether there was or was not tampering as the analysis of such data ultimately is dependent upon assumptions and information that is not certain. However, based on all of the information provided to us, particularly regarding the timing and sequencing of the measurements conducted by the game officials at halftime, and on our testing and analyses, we conclude that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls measured during halftime of the AFC Championship Game."

 

[moleculo]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...

Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

 

[moleculo]

Ok, it has been a long work week for me so have been remiss in not posting sooner. I am a Pats fan and was a defender of the team during SB week as I believed that the adamant defense Belichick and Kraft presented could ONLY be made by people who KNEW they would be exonerated. I initially disliked Brady's WEEI's non denial interview and his subsequent first press conference and felt that he was likely hiding something. But after Belichick and Kraft came out with their stances I wrongly believed the Patriots would be exonerated when the report finally came out. At that time I believed the Patriots were likely submitting under-inflated footballs but we're NOT tampering with the footballs post inspection. Indeed, it was only after Brady's "I don't believe I am a liar" comment that I began to have some doubts again. But now that I have read the texts from jastremski and "the deflator" I believe:

1. The Patriots tampered post inspection

2. Brady knew this was happening

3. Brady should be punished both for his involvement and his lack of cooperation. I think a 2-4 game suspension seems reasonable but honestly have NO idea how to judge the severity of the advantage

4. There is at least a 50% chance that Belichick didn't know what was happening

5. There is a 90% chance that Kraft didn't know

6. There is a highly likelihood that Brady lied to both Kraft and Belichick in the early days (and perhaps long thereafter) of the investigation

Anyway, just wanted to come back here to say I was wrong.

Lastly, I wanted to give a special call out to Moleculo - who impressed me so many months ago. Moleculo and I did not agree on a lot, but I always appreciated his ability to consume new info and have it reshape his stance. As such, I wanted to hold myself to that same standard here.

thank you.

 

[Jercules]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...

Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

It would be a good thing for people to learn about the NFL, and how widespread shady practices like football tampering actually are.

If people had the ability to put this in the proper context, they would be too embarrassed to investigate it to the degree you encourage.

 

[rjv]

No, I'm saying that there's no way a player knows whether coaching instructions come from legal or illegal taping.

Malcolm Butler said he knew exactly what play was coming, and it appears to be coaching instructions from legal taping. How would he ever know whether coaching instructions came from illegal taping? Same thing with Brady.

Tom is not stupid. When the OC talks to him on his headset and says the defense is going to run a fire zone blitz we need to run this protection and play, I am pretty sure he knows where this information came from.

BINGO!!!!!!! Perfect example. Pats fans please except your beloved team are not perfect.

like yor engrish

and now we resort to insults. Sorry for the mistake but you get my point.

 

[moleculo]

It would be a good thing for people to learn about the NFL, and how widespread shady practices like football tampering actually are.

If people had the ability to put this in the proper context, they would be too embarrassed to investigate it to the degree you encourage.

I don't let my kids get away with the old, "but everyone else is doing it!" excuse. I'm sure that flies for some folks, I think we should strive to hold ourselves to a higher standard and punish infractions as they are discovered.

 

[Road Warriors]

It would be a good thing for people to learn about the NFL, and how widespread shady practices like football tampering actually are.

If people had the ability to put this in the proper context, they would be too embarrassed to investigate it to the degree you encourage.

I don't let my kids get away with the old, "but everyone else is doing it!" excuse. I'm sure that flies for some folks, I think we should strive to hold ourselves to a higher standard and punish infractions as they are discovered.

Fully agree with this position. I also suggest we punish such infractions within the scope of the magnitude of the infraction.

 

[PatsWillWin]

c) Yes, the old "pattern of cheating" argument. Belichick was punished for Spygate, but Brady was not involved there. So that's 1 prior instance of breaking the rules by Belichick, and 0 by Brady. Now the phone calls where there is no proof of what was discussed, are more proof of Brady's guilt? Brady's pattern of cheating, where he had 0 prior instances of breaking the rules?

So you think that Tom Brady was just naive and simply believed that his offensive coordinator had some sort of ESP. He was just an ignorant pawn in Belichick's game.

How did Malcolm Butler make that game-clinching SB interception? Are you saying that because he knew the exact play coming, that the Patriots must have cheated there too?

Film study. The same way Tracy Porter basically ran the route for Reggie Wayne and picked off Manning in the Super bowl.

It one thing to argue against Deflategate but it is quite another to deny Spygate (when your coach already admitted it). It makes you sound a little crazy.

Wait, you think the Patriots used stolen signals to affect play calls on the field mid-game? That has never been seriously accussed by anyone in the NFL to my knowledge.

 

[PatsWillWin]

This story is frustrating and a little boring. A few things are clear to me:

1) The NFL really screwed up handling this. And I mean from the start. They don't have a record of the ball pressure pre-game. They don't know which gauge they used. I don't know why they let half of an AFC Championship go by before following it up (can you imagine if the Colts were a legitimate NFL playoff team and it was close?).

2) The Wells report has more holes than the 2015 NE secondary and seems like it started out with a conclusion already in mind.

3) BUT...much as I think the evidence is very shaky, the common sense walks like a duck/sounds like a duck/etc. conclusion you have to draw here is that Brady likes his balls lower, and probably told his guys to do whatever they had to do to get them there. I think it's possible that he didn't know they were actually deflating the balls post-inspection - I think it's possible most of the time they just submitted them lower and they passed inspection as is. But it does indeed seem more likely than not that he had to know what was going on. Even I can admit that, I think all Patriots fans should.

Where I'll differ from the rest of the Patriot-hating-planet is that this is a misdemeanor, not a felony, although it's been excacerbated by Brady not fully cooperating and coming clean with what was going on. That's where you really run afoul from Goodell. The penalty for SpyGate was not so stiff because SpyGate itself was such a big deal - it was because the NFL sent out letters to all teams to stop SpyGating, and the Patriots continued to do it anyways. If "SpyGate" had happened to another, less successful team that hadn't been warned previously, I think it rises to the Atlanata crows noise level, or Cleveland texting level (i.e. nobody really gives a ####).

Goodell needs to come out and lay out the punishment already, this is not good for the league having this in the headlines constantly. No idea what he's waiting for. Maybe Brady gets a "come to Jesus" meeting, we'll see.

Bottom line, at the end of the day, my take away from this is....Bledsoe was better.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Suspend brady and the hoodie already. Wtf is taking so long

 

[T J]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Zzzzzzzzzz.........

 

[12punch]

This thread is like the baboon cage at the zoo

 

[espnespn]

This thread is like the baboon cage at the zoo

 

[Tango]

This story is frustrating and a little boring. A few things are clear to me:

1) The NFL really screwed up handling this. And I mean from the start. They don't have a record of the ball pressure pre-game. They don't know which gauge they used. I don't know why they let half of an AFC Championship go by before following it up (can you imagine if the Colts were a legitimate NFL playoff team and it was close?).

2) The Wells report has more holes than the 2015 NE secondary and seems like it started out with a conclusion already in mind.

3) BUT...much as I think the evidence is very shaky, the common sense walks like a duck/sounds like a duck/etc. conclusion you have to draw here is that Brady likes his balls lower, and probably told his guys to do whatever they had to do to get them there. I think it's possible that he didn't know they were actually deflating the balls post-inspection - I think it's possible most of the time they just submitted them lower and they passed inspection as is. But it does indeed seem more likely than not that he had to know what was going on. Even I can admit that, I think all Patriots fans should.

Where I'll differ from the rest of the Patriot-hating-planet is that this is a misdemeanor, not a felony, although it's been excacerbated by Brady not fully cooperating and coming clean with what was going on. That's where you really run afoul from Goodell. The penalty for SpyGate was not so stiff because SpyGate itself was such a big deal - it was because the NFL sent out letters to all teams to stop SpyGating, and the Patriots continued to do it anyways. If "SpyGate" had happened to another, less successful team that hadn't been warned previously, I think it rises to the Atlanata crows noise level, or Cleveland texting level (i.e. nobody really gives a ####).

Goodell needs to come out and lay out the punishment already, this is not good for the league having this in the headlines constantly. No idea what he's waiting for. Maybe Brady gets a "come to Jesus" meeting, we'll see.

Bottom line, at the end of the day, my take away from this is....Bledsoe was better.

Point 3 is what matters now. You nailed it. So did Lupica.

 

[espnespn]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...

Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

Just so I'm reading the Transient Tests correctly, it is saying that if Patriots footballs were wet and measured within 4-5 minutes of being brought inside, then the cold weather would explain the PSI drop? And if they were measured after that, then cold weather could not explain the PSI drop (because the balls were slowly warming up after bring brought inside)?

And is the Wells Report discounting this because 4-5 minutes is not enough time to measure 11 footballs?

 

[Run It Up]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...

Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

Just so I'm reading the Transient Tests correctly, it is saying that if Patriots footballs were wet and measured within 4-5 minutes of being brought inside, then the cold weather would explain the PSI drop? And if they were measured after that, then cold weather could not explain the PSI drop (because the balls were slowly warming up after bring brought inside)?

And is the Wells Report discounting this because 4-5 minutes is not enough time to measure 11 footballs?

Exponent didn't account for evaporative cooling. But other than that yes.

Quote from Dale Syphers, Physics professor at Bowdoin.

"If you have a wet thing and you bring it into a dry environment, the water evaporates, and when water evaporates, it cools the object off," Syphers said. "A function of sweating is that as the water evaporates from us, it cools our bodies down. It happens to every single body that's wet, and (the Wells report) shows no difference (in the football) when they bring it in."

“My problem with that is that they left out a key environmental factor, and that's how wet those footballs were and the effect of evaporative cooling. And the fact that they don't do that well and didn't see that potentially totally changes the conclusions.”

 

[moleculo]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

Just so I'm reading the Transient Tests correctly, it is saying that if Patriots footballs were wet and measured within 4-5 minutes of being brought inside, then the cold weather would explain the PSI drop? And if they were measured after that, then cold weather could not explain the PSI drop (because the balls were slowly warming up after bring brought inside)?

And is the Wells Report discounting this because 4-5 minutes is not enough time to measure 11 footballs?

more like two minutes.Also, the clock starts the moment the balls were brought in. From pg 70 of the Wells report:

Based on the information provided by various witnesses to the halftime

measurements, we believe that it took approximately two to four minutes after the balls were

returned to the Officials Locker Room to devise, organize and begin implementing the testing

protocol. Based on information provided from Blakeman and Prioleau in particular, we estimate

that it took approximately four to five minutes to test the pressure of the eleven Patriots balls.

The Wells report also says that the balls were momentarily lost at halftime, they didn't get them into the locker Room immediately. No mention of how long that took.

so really, the balls didn't even start the testing process until after that window had closed - that is, there is no way the balls could have been at a temperature corresponding to a legal pressure.

This also assumes the Logo gauge was used to properly check the balls to start with. If you accept the assumption that the no-logo gauge was used initially, there is no window at all.

 

[moleculo]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...

Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

Just so I'm reading the Transient Tests correctly, it is saying that if Patriots footballs were wet and measured within 4-5 minutes of being brought inside, then the cold weather would explain the PSI drop? And if they were measured after that, then cold weather could not explain the PSI drop (because the balls were slowly warming up after bring brought inside)?

And is the Wells Report discounting this because 4-5 minutes is not enough time to measure 11 footballs?

Exponent didn't account for evaporative cooling. But other than that yes.

Quote from Dale Syphers, Physics professor at Bowdoin.

"If you have a wet thing and you bring it into a dry environment, the water evaporates, and when water evaporates, it cools the object off," Syphers said. "A function of sweating is that as the water evaporates from us, it cools our bodies down. It happens to every single body that's wet, and (the Wells report) shows no difference (in the football) when they bring it in."

“My problem with that is that they left out a key environmental factor, and that's how wet those footballs were and the effect of evaporative cooling. And the fact that they don't do that well and didn't see that potentially totally changes the conclusions.”

can you link me to Syphers statements? It's curious because they did specifically mention wet footballs warmed up slower and included that parameter in their transient heating test.

I don't think they mentioned evaporative cooling specifically, but that's the obvious mechanism.

 

[Run It Up]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...

Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

Just so I'm reading the Transient Tests correctly, it is saying that if Patriots footballs were wet and measured within 4-5 minutes of being brought inside, then the cold weather would explain the PSI drop? And if they were measured after that, then cold weather could not explain the PSI drop (because the balls were slowly warming up after bring brought inside)?

And is the Wells Report discounting this because 4-5 minutes is not enough time to measure 11 footballs?

Exponent didn't account for evaporative cooling. But other than that yes.

Quote from Dale Syphers, Physics professor at Bowdoin.

"If you have a wet thing and you bring it into a dry environment, the water evaporates, and when water evaporates, it cools the object off," Syphers said. "A function of sweating is that as the water evaporates from us, it cools our bodies down. It happens to every single body that's wet, and (the Wells report) shows no difference (in the football) when they bring it in."

“My problem with that is that they left out a key environmental factor, and that's how wet those footballs were and the effect of evaporative cooling. And the fact that they don't do that well and didn't see that potentially totally changes the conclusions.”

can you link me to Syphers statements? It's curious because they did specifically mention wet footballs warmed up slower and included that parameter in their transient heating test.

I don't think they mentioned evaporative cooling specifically, but that's the obvious mechanism.

Can't find the original, but it has spread to a couple outlets.

Was posted on reddit a few days ago.

"The problem that they address in many places in this report is how to approximate conditions on the field, conditions in the locker room, and so forth — all the various things that you don't know exactly," Syphers said. "(With) humidity of the rooms, they took a variation of parameters and temperature in a humidity-controlled environment and looked at that, and that was great. It's exactly what they should have done. The one place where they didn't do that was a wet football. They just used one technique."

If he were grading the Wells report like one of his students' papers, however, Syphers says it would have to be an incomplete.

"I would grade everything else they did — there are little pieces they did of the sciences, and most of them I would give an A," Syphers said. "(The way they tested the wet footballs) I would give a D to, and because it's such a lynchpin for the final conclusion, rather than grade the whole thing, I would send them back and say, 'No, you've got to do this right. This is wrong.'

"If this were a professional paper being submitted to a journal, as a reviewer, I would tell them, 'You did not do this part correctly and it cannot be published until you address these concerns and do that right.'"

Now we patiently wait for the people to point out that hes a Pats fan and dismiss actual science.

 

[the moops]

they lost the balls at halftime too? what a #### show

 

[espnespn]

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Well's report

Florio doesn't know what he's talking about. I went over this briefly a few hours ago, and in more detail a few days ago.

The gauges are just one of many discrepancies, but if you don't mind reiterating here as I apparently missed your previous posts.

here is where I talked about gauge discrepancies, and found out the reasoning as to why the non-logo gauge was assumed pre-game. I'm not sure I find this all that compelling. Fortunately, there's more...Here's some discussion in the Exponent report, where they say that, ultimately it doesn't matter which gauge is used.

my thoughts from this morning on Florio's report.

Look - I think that the Wells report doesn't do a good job of backing up assumptions and doesn't delve into the details that someone like me is interested in. If you want to say the Wells report is lacking, I might agree. Fortunately, he included the Exponent report as his appendix, which has a wealth of details on the physics as well as a multitude of laboratory experiments. Wells may not have been complete with all of the details, but his overall conclusions are consistent with the Exponent report.

I know - the next step is to claim that Exponent is a "shady" company...Fortunately, Wells had all of Exponents stuff reviewed by Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a physics professor at Princeton.

I have not had a chance to thoroughly review the Exponent paper. I didn't realize it was included until fairly late, and I only skimmed it because I was interested in the transient tests. As soon as I get a few spare hours, I'll be sure to go over it all in great detail. If I find anything glaring, I will be sure to point it out. I would encourage everyone else to do the same - it's never a bad thing for people to learn about physics/engineering.

Just so I'm reading the Transient Tests correctly, it is saying that if Patriots footballs were wet and measured within 4-5 minutes of being brought inside, then the cold weather would explain the PSI drop? And if they were measured after that, then cold weather could not explain the PSI drop (because the balls were slowly warming up after bring brought inside)?

And is the Wells Report discounting this because 4-5 minutes is not enough time to measure 11 footballs?

more like two minutes.Also, the clock starts the moment the balls were brought in. From pg 70 of the Wells report:

Based on the information provided by various witnesses to the halftime

measurements, we believe that it took approximately two to four minutes after the balls were

returned to the Officials Locker Room to devise, organize and begin implementing the testing

protocol. Based on information provided from Blakeman and Prioleau in particular, we estimate

that it took approximately four to five minutes to test the pressure of the eleven Patriots balls.

The Wells report also says that the balls were momentarily lost at halftime, they didn't get them into the locker Room immediately. No mention of how long that took.

so really, the balls didn't even start the testing process until after that window had closed - that is, there is no way the balls could have been at a temperature corresponding to a legal pressure.

This also assumes the Logo gauge was used to properly check the balls to start with. If you accept the assumption that the no-logo gauge was used initially, there is no window at all.

Hmmm, if ball bag was mesh, then the balls would start warming up pretty soon after they were brought into the building. But if the ball bag was a regular bag, wouldn't there be some air buffer to slow down the warming while it was being lugged to the locker room?

Also, Florio pointed out that the ref said the Logo gauge was used to check pre-game?

 

[moleculo]

Can't find the original, but it has spread to a couple outlets.

Was posted on reddit a few days ago.

"The problem that they address in many places in this report is how to approximate conditions on the field, conditions in the locker room, and so forth all the various things that you don't know exactly," Syphers said. "(With) humidity of the rooms, they took a variation of parameters and temperature in a humidity-controlled environment and looked at that, and that was great. It's exactly what they should have done. The one place where they didn't do that was a wet football. They just used one technique."

If he were grading the Wells report like one of his students' papers, however, Syphers says it would have to be an incomplete.

"I would grade everything else they did there are little pieces they did of the sciences, and most of them I would give an A," Syphers said. "(The way they tested the wet footballs) I would give a D to, and because it's such a lynchpin for the final conclusion, rather than grade the whole thing, I would send them back and say, 'No, you've got to do this right. This is wrong.'

"If this were a professional paper being submitted to a journal, as a reviewer, I would tell them, 'You did not do this part correctly and it cannot be published until you address these concerns and do that right.'"

Now we patiently wait for the people to point out that hes a Pats fan and dismiss actual science.

So, Syphers test was rolling a football in a pan of water, with no effort to towel it off.

Exponent, on the other hand, sprayed the balls with water and then toweled them off.

I don't know about you guys, but I've seen ball-boys toweling off footballs when it's raining. I also didn't see any puddles in Foxborough.

Further, from the Exponent report (pg 48),

Ball condition (wet and dry): according to information by Paul, Weiss, the ballboys

from each team left several balls (up to four) in their respective ball bags during the first

half. Ostensibly, these footballs remained dry. Although rain was observed in the first half,

information provided by Paul, Weiss indicates that the ballboys kept the balls relatively dry.

Clete Blakeman recalled that though some, but not all, of the balls were moist at halftime;

none were waterlogged.

 

[JIslander]

Ummm for the umpteenth time...texts and guy going by "deflator". Why waste your time on this?

 

[Bucky86]

Ummm for the umpteenth time...texts and guy going by "deflator". Why waste your time on this?

Because if you close your eyes, plug your ears, and scream loud enough eventually people will believe they're innocent.

 

[Run It Up]

Can't find the original, but it has spread to a couple outlets.

Was posted on reddit a few days ago.

"The problem that they address in many places in this report is how to approximate conditions on the field, conditions in the locker room, and so forth all the various things that you don't know exactly," Syphers said. "(With) humidity of the rooms, they took a variation of parameters and temperature in a humidity-controlled environment and looked at that, and that was great. It's exactly what they should have done. The one place where they didn't do that was a wet football. They just used one technique."

If he were grading the Wells report like one of his students' papers, however, Syphers says it would have to be an incomplete.

"I would grade everything else they did there are little pieces they did of the sciences, and most of them I would give an A," Syphers said. "(The way they tested the wet footballs) I would give a D to, and because it's such a lynchpin for the final conclusion, rather than grade the whole thing, I would send them back and say, 'No, you've got to do this right. This is wrong.'

"If this were a professional paper being submitted to a journal, as a reviewer, I would tell them, 'You did not do this part correctly and it cannot be published until you address these concerns and do that right.'"

Now we patiently wait for the people to point out that hes a Pats fan and dismiss actual science.

So, Syphers test was rolling a football in a pan of water, with no effort to towel it off.

Exponent, on the other hand, sprayed the balls with water and then toweled them off.

I don't know about you guys, but I've seen ball-boys toweling off footballs when it's raining. I also didn't see any puddles in Foxborough.

Further, from the Exponent report (pg 48),

Ball condition (wet and dry): according to information by Paul, Weiss, the ballboys

from each team left several balls (up to four) in their respective ball bags during the first

half. Ostensibly, these footballs remained dry. Although rain was observed in the first half,

information provided by Paul, Weiss indicates that the ballboys kept the balls relatively dry.

Clete Blakeman recalled that though some, but not all, of the balls were moist at halftime;

none were waterlogged.

Which do you think more accurately depicts pouring rain in cold weather, spritzing a ball every fifteen minutes or rolling it in a pan of water?

Obviously neither are perfect.

 

[12punch]

they lost the balls at halftime too? what a #### show

that is kind of funny because I can understand losing one football, but an entire ####### bag of them??

during a playoff game in which you're running some kind of sting to check these balls you lost?

 

[moleculo]

Hmmm, if ball bag was mesh, then the balls would start warming up pretty soon after they were brought into the building. But if the ball bag was a regular bag, wouldn't there be some air buffer to slow down the warming while it was being lugged to the locker room?

Also, Florio pointed out that the ref said the Logo gauge was used to check pre-game?

Here's the skinny on the gauges:

they both appear to be repeatable and accurate, with the caveat that the logo gauge consistently measured 0.3-0.4 psi higher. When compared to a calibrated master gauge, the no-logo gauge was almost exactly accurate while the logo gauge was high.

The Patriots staff said they aim for balls at 12.5 psi, and the colts said they submit at 13.0. As that's the pressures measured by the officials, one can surmise that the official used the more accurate gauge - that is, the no-logo gauge.