Patriots being investigated after Colts game (1 Viewer)

[TobiasFunke]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

I think that "debate" is solely about whether Brady was lying when he said he didn't notice anything - which as you say is really irrelevant because the report will in essence tell us if Brady was lying or not.

Ah, gotcha. Thanks

 

[Run It Up]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

Lmfao how does someone get to the point where they only reach these two conclusions?

Please walk me through your process?

 

[mbuehner]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

Virtually every word you wrote it incorrect. Read the thread.

 

[eBrian]

It's a big difference if you have both balls and you are trying to compare. One will be obviously firmer than the other.

But, if the ref or QB are given a single ball, or a few of them pumped to the same PSI, are they going to be able to tell by feel whether they are above or below 12.5? I'd imagine quarterbacks have no idea what 12.5 "feels" like, or 10.5 feels like. What they know is whether they like the feel of the ball they are holding or not. I'd guess it would have to be much lower for someone to know by feel that a ball was illegally low pressure.

For example, any of us can compare two significantly differently inflated car tires and feel which one is firmer. But if you walked up to random car and felt one tire you wouldn't be able to say by feel whether it was inflated to 25 psi or 32 psi or 36 psi.

Any of us maybe not, but if you take a 25psi tire to a tire garage, I bet the guy working there can tell. What a lot of this has come down to, for me, is that someone with the familiarity of a football like Brady, as an elite veteran NFL QB who has played football for many years and handles multiple footballs all day long through practice, would have been able to tell.

You could probably give me 2 balls, one at 10.5 and the other at 13.5 and I might not be able to tell the difference. I'd have to conduct several tests of my own before I could notice a difference (I'm guessing here, never have handled an NFL football). But someone who handles footballs all the time should be able to. I sit in front of a computer all day. If someone adjusted the resolution of my monitor, or changed the settings of my mouse sensitivity by 16%, I would notice.

I can't get past Brady's statement that he didn't notice the ball pressure was different from, as he stated "12.5 is perfect for me" (paraphrased). If 12.5 is perfect, and that's what he's been using for the last 20 years of playing football, then I cannot believe that he did not notice it had dropped to 10.5, or even 11.0, etc.

My point is not that you can't tell the difference. Brady and you and I can all probably tell by feel that a 10.5 is softer than a 12.5. My point is that if any of us had a single ball we'd have no idea of the actual psi - the number itself. The tire guy might know because it's his job to inflate to 30, and he uses a gauge to do it. Brady doesn't use a gauge. He just knows too hard, good, or too soft.

Alright, I understood.

As I said, what bothers me is that he claimed not to notice. He would have noticed something's off, maybe not that it's 10.5 vs 11.5 vs 12.5, but certainly that something had to be off. You know, if he had just said "Hey, it felt softer but I didn't have time to worry about that. It was cold, rainy and we were playing an important game.", then that would have been enough for me. To just flat out deny that he noticed any difference with the ball makes me think he's lying.

 

[MG345]

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/NEW-Fumble-Chart-3.png

That site has been down most of the afternoon, after it got posted on Reddit. Here is a mirror (sort of): http://i.imgur.com/7VtMGwg.jpg

 

[Bucky86]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

Virtually every word you wrote it incorrect. Read the thread.

Just because the facts aren't what you like doesn't make them incorrect.

 

[stbugs]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Some people think that it is a gigantic advantage. I personally don't and think that the rule change to allow offenses to have their own balls shows that they wanted each team to have the balls the way they liked so that there wasn't a home team advantage (see the links about what people would do for baby hands Alex Smith). I think the Colts are sore losers and decided to make a stink before and after the loss to make sure NE got penalized even though I think the spirit of the rule is to allow each team's QB to have balls they prefer and no one really cared that much as long as they weren't ridiculous. Watch the video of the officials checking balls "close enough" and talking about kickers (who are supposed to share NFL sanctioned balls) roughing them up.

I think there was a rule, but if it wasn't called out and leaked to the media by a Colts reporter, the NFL might not have done much of anything, because the rule is to allow offenses to tailor their balls within reason. The balls in question were replaced in game, so the situation was remedied in game, but this has turned in a media circus with people making it seem like it is on the level of taking out Brett Favre with cheap shots intended to injure during the championship game. Personally, I think that bounty gate got a lot less of a media frenzy than this has. I don't remember it being dissected to the same level, i.e. CNN showing each and every cheap shot and interviewing Brett Favre, etc.

 

[Run It Up]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

Virtually every word you wrote it incorrect. Read the thread.

Just because the facts aren't what you like doesn't make them incorrect.

 

[cstu]

A lot of discussion here about 30 degrees, when in fact the temperature at the game was 51 degrees.

This guy did the calculations - he uses 49 degrees as the gametime temp going from 70 degrees:

atriotsniknight_ml[] 42 points 4 days ago*

Science teacher here. Given the conditions of the game, a ball which meets specifications in the locker room could easily lose enough pressure to be considered under-inflated. Some math:

Guy-Lussac's Law describes the relationship between the pressure of a confined ideal gas and its temperature. For the sake of argument, we will assume that the football is a rigid enough container (unless a ball is massively deflated, it's volume won't change). The relationship is (P1/T1) = (P2/T2), where P is the pressure and T is the temperature in Kelvins.

The balls are inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 psi at a temperature of 70 degrees Farenheit (294.1 K). Let's assume an average ball has a gauge pressure of 13 psi. This makes the absolute pressure of the ball 27.7 psi (gauge + atmosphere). Since these are initial values, we will call them P1 and T1.

The game time temperature was 49 degrees F (278 K). We are attempting to solve for the new pressure at this temperature, P2. We plug everything into the equation and get (27.7/294.1) = (P2/278). At the game time temperature, the balls would have an absolute pressure of 26.2 psi and a gauge pressure of 11.5, below league specifications.

*Furthermore, given that it was raining all day, the air in the stadium was saturated with water vapor. At 70 degrees, water has a vapor pressure of 0.38 psi. The total pressure of the ball is equal to the pressure of the air inside the ball and the vaporized water in the ball. At 49 degrees, the vapor pressure of water is 0.13 psi. Up to 0.25 additional psi can be lost if the balls were inflated by either the team or the refs prior to the game. Granted, it's unlikely that anyone would inflate balls from 0, but it easily could cost another couple hundredths of a psi in pressure.

For a ball that barely meets specifications (12.5 psi gauge), it's pressure would drop to 11.1 psi during the game... enough to be considered massively underinflated.

edit: As the poster noted below, forgot to account for the difference between gauge and absolute pressure. Calculations have been updated.

Also the game balls were likely measured inside so a 10.5 PSI inside at 70 degrees would have been 9.1 on the field.

 

[Bucky86]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

Virtually every word you wrote it incorrect. Read the thread.

Just because the facts aren't what you like doesn't make them incorrect.

A minimum, 11 of 12 balls from only one team were under inflated by at least 2PSI. That's a fact. The question now is how did this happen since weather has already been ruled out.

 

[stbugs]

Colts balls were at 14 PSI. Close enough to the 13.5 that the officials didn't care. Pats balls were at 12 PSI. Close enough that officials didn't care.

All balls lose 1.5 PSI due to conditions. Colts balls are at 12.5, and deemed within the acceptable range. Pats balls are down to 10.5 PSI, which is the 2 PSI difference from acceptable.

I'm just making #### up obviously.

That's not what happened though, there was no significant loss of PSI on the Colts' balls. If all the balls PSI dropped an even amount, this wouldn't be an issue. Hell, the 12 balls from NE didn't deflate at a common rate so that even points further to tampering.

The only way the Colts balls didn't see a deflation is if there wasn't any. No deflation means they did not see a temperature drop. It's basic physics, people, you can't really work around this.

The reason the Colts balls did not see a temperature drop is because they were checked at halftime at the same temperature they were checked at pre-game - i.e. in the warmth and comfort of the officials locker room.

Therefore, we can surmise that the temperature differential played no role in any loss of pressure, Colts balls or Patriots balls.

Which leaves open the question - what happened to the 2 PSI in the patriots balls?

How much of this is fact? Do we actually know where the balls at halftime were measured and the exact pressures? When people say the Colts balls were in spec, does that actually mean there was no delfation or that they started at the high end and were still within the low end?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

Lmfao how does someone get to the point where they only reach these two conclusions?

Please walk me through your process?

Sure!

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

2. At halftime, 11 or 12 of the Patriots' 12 balls lost "at least" 2 psi. Colts' balls were still OK.

3. At the end of the game all 24 balls, including those of the Colts which did not come under suspicion, tested within the proper range again.

All of that per Peter King here. If you want to launch into a crazy conspiracy theory here because King is a league apologist based on his screwup on the Rice incident go for it, but keep in mind that assuming guilt based on a previous misdeed is not a good look if you apply the same standards to the Pats.

So you can dismiss the notion that some external force (weather or whatever else you can come up with other than human interference) caused a pressure drop, because that would not explain the Pats' balls dropping >2 psi in two hours while the Colts' balls dropped <1 psi both over those same two hours and also over 4 hours.

That means something specific to the Pats caused their balls to lose pressure. If you've got an explanation other than someone affiliated with the Pats doing it deliberately, I'm all ears. But I can't come up with one, which leaves two possibilities: (1) someone in the Pats' org did it without Brady's knowledge, or (2) someone did it with Brady's knowledge. #1 seems impossible given the well-established principle that QBs are meticulous about the balls that will be put in play. So that leaves #2. But like I said, if you've got a plausible alternative theory I'd love to hear it.

 

[MG345]

A lot of discussion here about 30 degrees, when in fact the temperature at the game was 51 degrees.

This guy did the calculations - he uses 49 degrees as the gametime temp going from 70 degrees:

atriotsniknight_ml[] 42 points 4 days ago*

Science teacher here. Given the conditions of the game, a ball which meets specifications in the locker room could easily lose enough pressure to be considered under-inflated. Some math:

Guy-Lussac's Law describes the relationship between the pressure of a confined ideal gas and its temperature. For the sake of argument, we will assume that the football is a rigid enough container (unless a ball is massively deflated, it's volume won't change). The relationship is (P1/T1) = (P2/T2), where P is the pressure and T is the temperature in Kelvins.

The balls are inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 psi at a temperature of 70 degrees Farenheit (294.1 K). Let's assume an average ball has a gauge pressure of 13 psi. This makes the absolute pressure of the ball 27.7 psi (gauge + atmosphere). Since these are initial values, we will call them P1 and T1.

The game time temperature was 49 degrees F (278 K). We are attempting to solve for the new pressure at this temperature, P2. We plug everything into the equation and get (27.7/294.1) = (P2/278). At the game time temperature, the balls would have an absolute pressure of 26.2 psi and a gauge pressure of 11.5, below league specifications.

*Furthermore, given that it was raining all day, the air in the stadium was saturated with water vapor. At 70 degrees, water has a vapor pressure of 0.38 psi. The total pressure of the ball is equal to the pressure of the air inside the ball and the vaporized water in the ball. At 49 degrees, the vapor pressure of water is 0.13 psi. Up to 0.25 additional psi can be lost if the balls were inflated by either the team or the refs prior to the game. Granted, it's unlikely that anyone would inflate balls from 0, but it easily could cost another couple hundredths of a psi in pressure.

For a ball that barely meets specifications (12.5 psi gauge), it's pressure would drop to 11.1 psi during the game... enough to be considered massively underinflated.

edit: As the poster noted below, forgot to account for the difference between gauge and absolute pressure. Calculations have been updated.

Also the game balls were likely measured inside so a 10.5 PSI inside at 70 degrees would have been 9.1 on the field.

Ok hold up. The math, which looks to be correct, can only account for a 1 PSI drop in the balls, when we know there was at the VERY LEAST 2 PSI drop? this isn't helping the Pats argument.

 

[Run It Up]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Guys who are so familiar with the feel of a football they are positive the difference intuitively obvious and they somehow know what 2psi means in terms of football inflation.

Why does it matter? The balls were deflated by someone- there's no other explanation for the drop. Therefore the only possible explanations (setting aside the "NFL is lying about testing them" conspiracy theory nutjobs) are (1) a ballboy went over the head of Tom Brady and messed with the balls on his own accord (ridiculous- everyone agrees that QBs are meticulous about the balls that are put into play, it strains credibility to imagine a ballboy doing this) or (2) Brady/the Pats cheated.

Whether the end result of that cheating is detectable to the Boston Globe newsroom or Joe Theismann is 100% irrelevant. Cheating is cheating.

Virtually every word you wrote it incorrect. Read the thread.

Just because the facts aren't what you like doesn't make them incorrect.

A minimum, 11 of 12 balls from only one team were under inflated by at least 2PSI. That's a fact. The question now is how did this happen since weather has already been ruled out.

12 of the 12 balls were underinflated. The refs were prompted to inspect the balls at half time.

Those are the only facts at this time.

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

 

[Vike Me]

Don't care Tom, You're still the starter in my fantasy league for two.

 

[moleculo]

Colts balls were at 14 PSI. Close enough to the 13.5 that the officials didn't care. Pats balls were at 12 PSI. Close enough that officials didn't care.

All balls lose 1.5 PSI due to conditions. Colts balls are at 12.5, and deemed within the acceptable range. Pats balls are down to 10.5 PSI, which is the 2 PSI difference from acceptable.

I'm just making #### up obviously.

That's not what happened though, there was no significant loss of PSI on the Colts' balls. If all the balls PSI dropped an even amount, this wouldn't be an issue. Hell, the 12 balls from NE didn't deflate at a common rate so that even points further to tampering.

The only way the Colts balls didn't see a deflation is if there wasn't any. No deflation means they did not see a temperature drop. It's basic physics, people, you can't really work around this.

The reason the Colts balls did not see a temperature drop is because they were checked at halftime at the same temperature they were checked at pre-game - i.e. in the warmth and comfort of the officials locker room.

Therefore, we can surmise that the temperature differential played no role in any loss of pressure, Colts balls or Patriots balls.

Which leaves open the question - what happened to the 2 PSI in the patriots balls?

How much of this is fact? Do we actually know where the balls at halftime were measured and the exact pressures? When people say the Colts balls were in spec, does that actually mean there was no delfation or that they started at the high end and were still within the low end?

we don't know, all we can do is surmise based on the (shoddy) information at hand.

With what we know now, there's at least 1 psi unaccounted for from the Patriots balls, possibly over 2 PSI (depending on various measuring conditions).

Those PSI could be from the patriots staff submitting under-inflated balls to the refs (intentionally or not), who failed to fully inspect them, or the PSI may be missing due to post-inspection modification.

 

[stbugs]

Forgive me for not following along here, but what exactly does it matter if people can tell the difference between 2 psi or not?

Because some people don't want their precious Tom Brady's reputation hurt in any way.

LOL, maybe the Pats fans do, but maybe some of us other NFL, non Pats fans hate these media fueled controversies. I thought the Saints trying to injure Favre was far worse and had far more actual impact on who made a Super Bowl. The Saints got punished and I thought it was warranted. This is silly to me. ESPN has a science show that says the difference was negligible with 2 PSI difference, yet their same talking heads act like the advantage was similar to the Pats playing with 13 guys on offense.

 

[Niles Standish]

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/NEW-Fumble-Chart-3.png

That site has been down most of the afternoon, after it got posted on Reddit. Here is a mirror (sort of): http://i.imgur.com/7VtMGwg.jpg

Interesting so the Falcons and Colts both look better than the Pats so the Pats are 1 in 16,000 the Colts and Falcons must be even more statistically significant. Looking at total fumbles not fumbles lost. Well the Colts didn't look better after Manning left, but during the Manning years were better. They fell apart without Peyton and fumbled a lot more.

 

[The General]

This thread, and all the media hoopla is focused on one game.

What if there was cold, hard data with statistical analysis that proved the Patriots had a statistically abnormal fumble rate for every season going back to 2007? Such that the chance of it randomly occurring was less than 0.001%?

What if their fumble rate was such an outlier as to suggest that this was a long running scheme?

Find it here:

[SIZE=10pt]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/?p=293[/SIZE]

“Based on the assumption that fumbles per play follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten over this period, once in 16,233.77 instances”. Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0000616 probability to win. Which in other words, it’s very unlikely that it’s a coincidence.”

Yesterday I investigated whether or not the New England Patriots outperform expectations in bad weather. I had several recommendations to look at home and road data, as opposed to just home data. Mulling whether or not to undertake that further (time consuming) analysis, I watched this video:


I immediately noticed something that cannot be overlooked: the issue with ball security and fumbles. Then I remembered this remarkable fact:

The 2014 Patriots were just the 3rd team in the last 25 years to never have lost a fumble at home! The biggest difference between the Patriots and the other 2 teams who did it was that New England ran between 150 and 200 MORE plays this year than those teams did in the years they had zero home fumbles, making the Patriots stand alone in this unique statistic.

Based on the desire to incorporate full season data (not just home games, as a team theoretically bring “doctored footballs” with them on the road) I performed the following analysis:

I looked at the last 5 years of data (since 2010) and examined TOTAL FUMBLES in all games (as well as fumbles/game) but more importantly, TOTAL OFFENSIVE PLAYS RUN. Thus, we can to determine average PLAYS per FUMBLE, a much more valuable statistic. The results are displayed in the chart below. Keep in mind, this is for all games since 2010, regardless of indoors, outdoors, weather, site, etc. EVERYTHING.

(click to enlarge)

One can CLEARLY SEE the Patriots, visually, are off the chart. There is no other team even close to being near to their rate of 187 offensive plays (passes+rushes+sacks) per fumble. The league average is 105 plays/fumble. Most teams are within 21 plays of that number.

I spoke with a data scientist who I know from work on the NFLproject.com website, and sent him the data. He said:

I actually went back and researched 5 year periods for the entire NFL over the last 25 years. The Patriots ratio of 187 plays to 1 fumble is the BEST of ANY team in the NFL for ANY 5 year span of time over the last 25 years. Not was it just the best, it wasn’t close:

Based on the assumption that fumbles per play follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten over this period, once in 16,233.77 instances”.

Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0000616 probability to win. Which in other words, it’s very unlikely that it’s a coincidence.

1. 2010-2014 Patriots: 187 plays/fumble
2. 2009-2013 Patriots: 156 plays/fumble
3. 2006-2010 Colts: 156 plays/fumble
4. 2005-2009 Colts: 153 plays/fumble
5. 2007-2011 Patriots: 149 plays/fumble
6. 2008-2012 Patriots: 148 plays/fumble
7. 2010-2014 Texans: 140 plays/fumble
8. 2004-2008 Colts: 139 plays/fumble
9. 2006-2010 Jets: 135 plays/fumble
10. 1999-2003 Chiefs: 134 plays/fumble

There are a few key takeaways. First and foremost, the 187 plays/fumble dwarfs even the rest of the best seasons the last 25 years. Second, the Patriots have been at the top of the NFL since 2007.

Ironically, as my study yesterday showed, the Patriots performance in wet weather home games mysteriously turned ridiculous starting in 2007. In 2006, they went 0-2. From 2007 onward, they went 14-1.

The next obvious question becomes, where were the Patriots in this statistic pre-2007? Take a look:

(click to enlarge)

As you can see, the Patriots won their Super Bowls having a below average rate of fumbles lost given today’s average of 105 plays/game. But in 2007, something happened to propel them to a much better rate (you’ll remember, that just so happened to be the same year they went 16-0 in the regular season). But even looking at these numbers, its clear how insane the 187 number is: they are almost running 100 MORE plays without a single fumble as compared to the 2002-2006 period when they won 2 of their 3 Super Bowls.

To further illustrate how these numbers are astonishing, the below graphics lay out clearly how far off the Patriots are from the rest of the league. Its evident to the eye how far removed they are from the norm. Whether we look at a histogram laying it out, where the Patriots and their 187 plays/fumble is far from the “bell shaped curve”:

(click to enlarge)

or the same chart as above, this time displaying color bands as we move away from the 105 plays/fumble average. You can see the darker red band contains all teams but the bottom 3 and the top 3, and that the bottom 3 are very close to the darker red band. Meanwhile, the Patriots are really in a league of their own:

(click to enlarge)

Could the Patriots be so good that they just defy the numbers? As my friend theorized: Perhaps they’ve invented a revolutionary in-house way to protect the ball, or perhaps they’ve intentionally stocked their skill positions with players who don’t have a propensity to fumble. Or perhaps still, they call plays which intentionally result in a lower percentage of fumbles. Or maybe its just that they play with deflated footballs on offense. It could be any combination of the above.

But regardless of what, specifically, is causing these numbers, the fact remains: this is an extremely abnormal occurrence and is NOT simply random fluctuation.

_____________________________________

UPDATE: It was suggested that I look at ALL fumbles, not just fumbles lost. With that said, let’s look there:

First, it should be noted (as the tables above show) that teams playing indoors fumble the ball less frequently. Reasons are many, foremost the ball won’t be wet from precipitation, damp from late night condensation, and a variety of other reasons. Which is why, if you look at the very first chart I posted above, you’ll see the teams who fumble the MOST/play are generally colder weather teams who play outdoors (PHI, DEN, BUF, PIT, WAS, NYG, KC, NYJ). Whereas at the other end of the spectrum, aside from the Patriots in their own world, are HOU, ATL and NO, all dome teams.

The below graphic looks at ALL fumbles over 5 year periods the last 25 years. I planned to cut this off at JUST the top 10 teams, but all we would have seen were the Patriots and dome teams. Top 15 would have accomplished the same. So I had to expand to the top 25 team periods. As you can see, of the top 25 team-periods, 17 are dome teams, including 11 of the top 15. First, let’s look at the chart, then we’ll look at comparisons to average:

(click to enlarge)

As is apparent, the Patriots are the only outdoor NFL team the last 25 years to average 70 plays/fumble or better, and they did it from 2007-2014 (four, five year periods). Its simply uncanny, as the statistics above similarly showed.

Averages:

• Over the last 25 years, indoor teams averaged 43 plays/fumble (in all games they played that season, regardless of site, understanding that half their games would be played indoor sans-weather).
• Since 2000, they improved to 46 plays/fumble.
• Over the last 25 years, outdoor teams averaged 41 plays/fumble.
• Since 2000, they improved to 43 plays/fumble.

The Patriots averaged 73 plays/fumble the past 5 years, almost 70% better than the 43 plays/fumble that outdoor teams averaged since 2000.

Next, lets look only at the current 5 year period:

The league average plays per fumble from 2010 thru 2014 was 50 plays/fumble.

• For indoor teams, the average was 55 plays/fumble.
• For outdoor teams, excluding the Patriots, the average was 46 plays/fumble (9 fewer).

The Patriots averaged 73 plays/fumble, almost 60% MORE than outdoor teams, and almost 50% MORE than the league average the past 5 years.

(click to enlarge)

Since we now can clearly in the data, both near term and long term, that dome-based teams (who play at least 8 games out of the elements) have an advantage in the fumble department, we can exclude them from comparisons to the Patriots.

If we do, I can produce a chart identical to the one at the very top which looked ONLY at fumbles lost. This one looks at ALL fumbles, whether lost or recovered. I think the point still remains:

(click to enlarge)

If this chart looks nearly identical, it should. The Patriots are so “off the map” when it comes to either fumbles or only fumbles lost. As mentioned earlier: this is an extremely abnormal occurrence and is NOT simply random fluctuation.

Maybe the 3rd time this will take.

People are having a hard time grasping the timeline and why the Pats altering the ball would be a big deal.

There's no way there that article is going to take.

 

[moleculo]

It's a big difference if you have both balls and you are trying to compare. One will be obviously firmer than the other.

But, if the ref or QB are given a single ball, or a few of them pumped to the same PSI, are they going to be able to tell by feel whether they are above or below 12.5? I'd imagine quarterbacks have no idea what 12.5 "feels" like, or 10.5 feels like. What they know is whether they like the feel of the ball they are holding or not. I'd guess it would have to be much lower for someone to know by feel that a ball was illegally low pressure.

For example, any of us can compare two significantly differently inflated car tires and feel which one is firmer. But if you walked up to random car and felt one tire you wouldn't be able to say by feel whether it was inflated to 25 psi or 32 psi or 36 psi.

Any of us maybe not, but if you take a 25psi tire to a tire garage, I bet the guy working there can tell. What a lot of this has come down to, for me, is that someone with the familiarity of a football like Brady, as an elite veteran NFL QB who has played football for many years and handles multiple footballs all day long through practice, would have been able to tell.

You could probably give me 2 balls, one at 10.5 and the other at 13.5 and I might not be able to tell the difference. I'd have to conduct several tests of my own before I could notice a difference (I'm guessing here, never have handled an NFL football). But someone who handles footballs all the time should be able to. I sit in front of a computer all day. If someone adjusted the resolution of my monitor, or changed the settings of my mouse sensitivity by 16%, I would notice.

I can't get past Brady's statement that he didn't notice the ball pressure was different from, as he stated "12.5 is perfect for me" (paraphrased). If 12.5 is perfect, and that's what he's been using for the last 20 years of playing football, then I cannot believe that he did not notice it had dropped to 10.5, or even 11.0, etc.

My point is not that you can't tell the difference. Brady and you and I can all probably tell by feel that a 10.5 is softer than a 12.5. My point is that if any of us had a single ball we'd have no idea of the actual psi - the number itself. The tire guy might know because it's his job to inflate to 30, and he uses a gauge to do it. Brady doesn't use a gauge. He just knows too hard, good, or too soft.

Alright, I understood.

As I said, what bothers me is that he claimed not to notice. He would have noticed something's off, maybe not that it's 10.5 vs 11.5 vs 12.5, but certainly that something had to be off. You know, if he had just said "Hey, it felt softer but I didn't have time to worry about that. It was cold, rainy and we were playing an important game.", then that would have been enough for me. To just flat out deny that he noticed any difference with the ball makes me think he's lying.

Brady didn't lie. The underinflated balls felt normal to him because he's been playing with underinflated balls since 2007.

 

[the moops]

We need to make a list of things that slightly deflated footballs cause

1) prevention of fumbles

2) people to lose their ####### mind

3)

 

[Road Warriors]

A lot of discussion here about 30 degrees, when in fact the temperature at the game was 51 degrees.

This guy did the calculations - he uses 49 degrees as the gametime temp going from 70 degrees:

atriotsniknight_ml[] 42 points 4 days ago*

Science teacher here. Given the conditions of the game, a ball which meets specifications in the locker room could easily lose enough pressure to be considered under-inflated. Some math:

Guy-Lussac's Law describes the relationship between the pressure of a confined ideal gas and its temperature. For the sake of argument, we will assume that the football is a rigid enough container (unless a ball is massively deflated, it's volume won't change). The relationship is (P1/T1) = (P2/T2), where P is the pressure and T is the temperature in Kelvins.

The balls are inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 psi at a temperature of 70 degrees Farenheit (294.1 K). Let's assume an average ball has a gauge pressure of 13 psi. This makes the absolute pressure of the ball 27.7 psi (gauge + atmosphere). Since these are initial values, we will call them P1 and T1.

The game time temperature was 49 degrees F (278 K). We are attempting to solve for the new pressure at this temperature, P2. We plug everything into the equation and get (27.7/294.1) = (P2/278). At the game time temperature, the balls would have an absolute pressure of 26.2 psi and a gauge pressure of 11.5, below league specifications.

*Furthermore, given that it was raining all day, the air in the stadium was saturated with water vapor. At 70 degrees, water has a vapor pressure of 0.38 psi. The total pressure of the ball is equal to the pressure of the air inside the ball and the vaporized water in the ball. At 49 degrees, the vapor pressure of water is 0.13 psi. Up to 0.25 additional psi can be lost if the balls were inflated by either the team or the refs prior to the game. Granted, it's unlikely that anyone would inflate balls from 0, but it easily could cost another couple hundredths of a psi in pressure.

For a ball that barely meets specifications (12.5 psi gauge), it's pressure would drop to 11.1 psi during the game... enough to be considered massively underinflated.

edit: As the poster noted below, forgot to account for the difference between gauge and absolute pressure. Calculations have been updated.

Also the game balls were likely measured inside so a 10.5 PSI inside at 70 degrees would have been 9.1 on the field.

and the air inside the ball warms to room temperature within minutes?

 

[Run It Up]

A lot of discussion here about 30 degrees, when in fact the temperature at the game was 51 degrees.

This guy did the calculations - he uses 49 degrees as the gametime temp going from 70 degrees:

atriotsniknight_ml[] 42 points 4 days ago*

Science teacher here. Given the conditions of the game, a ball which meets specifications in the locker room could easily lose enough pressure to be considered under-inflated. Some math:

Guy-Lussac's Law describes the relationship between the pressure of a confined ideal gas and its temperature. For the sake of argument, we will assume that the football is a rigid enough container (unless a ball is massively deflated, it's volume won't change). The relationship is (P1/T1) = (P2/T2), where P is the pressure and T is the temperature in Kelvins.

The balls are inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 psi at a temperature of 70 degrees Farenheit (294.1 K). Let's assume an average ball has a gauge pressure of 13 psi. This makes the absolute pressure of the ball 27.7 psi (gauge + atmosphere). Since these are initial values, we will call them P1 and T1.

The game time temperature was 49 degrees F (278 K). We are attempting to solve for the new pressure at this temperature, P2. We plug everything into the equation and get (27.7/294.1) = (P2/278). At the game time temperature, the balls would have an absolute pressure of 26.2 psi and a gauge pressure of 11.5, below league specifications.

*Furthermore, given that it was raining all day, the air in the stadium was saturated with water vapor. At 70 degrees, water has a vapor pressure of 0.38 psi. The total pressure of the ball is equal to the pressure of the air inside the ball and the vaporized water in the ball. At 49 degrees, the vapor pressure of water is 0.13 psi. Up to 0.25 additional psi can be lost if the balls were inflated by either the team or the refs prior to the game. Granted, it's unlikely that anyone would inflate balls from 0, but it easily could cost another couple hundredths of a psi in pressure.

For a ball that barely meets specifications (12.5 psi gauge), it's pressure would drop to 11.1 psi during the game... enough to be considered massively underinflated.

edit: As the poster noted below, forgot to account for the difference between gauge and absolute pressure. Calculations have been updated.

Also the game balls were likely measured inside so a 10.5 PSI inside at 70 degrees would have been 9.1 on the field.

and the air inside the ball warms to room temperature within minutes?

Immediately whenever convenient.

 

[TobiasFunke]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

 

[BroadwayG]

Has the head ref, under oath, testified that he tested each individual ball prior to the game starting?

 

[parrot]

From King's Report

• The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge at halftime. I am told either 11 or 12 of New England’s footballs (ESPN’s Chris Mortensen reported it was 11, and I hear it could have been all 12) had at least two pounds less pressure in them. All 12 Indianapolis footballs were at the prescribed level.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge after the game. All 24 checked at the correct pressure—which is one of the last pieces of the puzzle the league needed to determine with certainty that something fishy happened with the Patriots footballs, because the Colts’ balls stayed correctly inflated for the nearly four hours. There had been reports quoting atmospheric experts that cold weather could deflate footballs. But if the Patriots’ balls were all low, and the Colts’ balls all legit, that quashes that theory.

He uses the phrase "were checked by pressure gauge" twice, both in referring to halftime, and after the game, but not in reference to the pregame check. Why make that specific distinction twice but not three times?

 

[MG345]

This thread, and all the media hoopla is focused on one game.

What if there was cold, hard data with statistical analysis that proved the Patriots had a statistically abnormal fumble rate for every season going back to 2007? Such that the chance of it randomly occurring was less than 0.001%?

What if their fumble rate was such an outlier as to suggest that this was a long running scheme?

Find it here:

[SIZE=10pt]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/?p=293[/SIZE]

“Based on the assumption that fumbles per play follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten over this period, once in 16,233.77 instances”. Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0000616 probability to win. Which in other words, it’s very unlikely that it’s a coincidence.”

Yesterday I investigated whether or not the New England Patriots outperform expectations in bad weather. I had several recommendations to look at home and road data, as opposed to just home data. Mulling whether or not to undertake that further (time consuming) analysis, I watched this video:


I immediately noticed something that cannot be overlooked: the issue with ball security and fumbles. Then I remembered this remarkable fact:

The 2014 Patriots were just the 3rd team in the last 25 years to never have lost a fumble at home! The biggest difference between the Patriots and the other 2 teams who did it was that New England ran between 150 and 200 MORE plays this year than those teams did in the years they had zero home fumbles, making the Patriots stand alone in this unique statistic.

Based on the desire to incorporate full season data (not just home games, as a team theoretically bring “doctored footballs” with them on the road) I performed the following analysis:

I looked at the last 5 years of data (since 2010) and examined TOTAL FUMBLES in all games (as well as fumbles/game) but more importantly, TOTAL OFFENSIVE PLAYS RUN. Thus, we can to determine average PLAYS per FUMBLE, a much more valuable statistic. The results are displayed in the chart below. Keep in mind, this is for all games since 2010, regardless of indoors, outdoors, weather, site, etc. EVERYTHING.

(click to enlarge)

One can CLEARLY SEE the Patriots, visually, are off the chart. There is no other team even close to being near to their rate of 187 offensive plays (passes+rushes+sacks) per fumble. The league average is 105 plays/fumble. Most teams are within 21 plays of that number.

I spoke with a data scientist who I know from work on the NFLproject.com website, and sent him the data. He said:

I actually went back and researched 5 year periods for the entire NFL over the last 25 years. The Patriots ratio of 187 plays to 1 fumble is the BEST of ANY team in the NFL for ANY 5 year span of time over the last 25 years. Not was it just the best, it wasn’t close:

Based on the assumption that fumbles per play follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten over this period, once in 16,233.77 instances”.

Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0000616 probability to win. Which in other words, it’s very unlikely that it’s a coincidence.

1. 2010-2014 Patriots: 187 plays/fumble
2. 2009-2013 Patriots: 156 plays/fumble
3. 2006-2010 Colts: 156 plays/fumble
4. 2005-2009 Colts: 153 plays/fumble
5. 2007-2011 Patriots: 149 plays/fumble
6. 2008-2012 Patriots: 148 plays/fumble
7. 2010-2014 Texans: 140 plays/fumble
8. 2004-2008 Colts: 139 plays/fumble
9. 2006-2010 Jets: 135 plays/fumble
10. 1999-2003 Chiefs: 134 plays/fumble

There are a few key takeaways. First and foremost, the 187 plays/fumble dwarfs even the rest of the best seasons the last 25 years. Second, the Patriots have been at the top of the NFL since 2007.

Ironically, as my study yesterday showed, the Patriots performance in wet weather home games mysteriously turned ridiculous starting in 2007. In 2006, they went 0-2. From 2007 onward, they went 14-1.

The next obvious question becomes, where were the Patriots in this statistic pre-2007? Take a look:

(click to enlarge)

As you can see, the Patriots won their Super Bowls having a below average rate of fumbles lost given today’s average of 105 plays/game. But in 2007, something happened to propel them to a much better rate (you’ll remember, that just so happened to be the same year they went 16-0 in the regular season). But even looking at these numbers, its clear how insane the 187 number is: they are almost running 100 MORE plays without a single fumble as compared to the 2002-2006 period when they won 2 of their 3 Super Bowls.

To further illustrate how these numbers are astonishing, the below graphics lay out clearly how far off the Patriots are from the rest of the league. Its evident to the eye how far removed they are from the norm. Whether we look at a histogram laying it out, where the Patriots and their 187 plays/fumble is far from the “bell shaped curve”:

(click to enlarge)

or the same chart as above, this time displaying color bands as we move away from the 105 plays/fumble average. You can see the darker red band contains all teams but the bottom 3 and the top 3, and that the bottom 3 are very close to the darker red band. Meanwhile, the Patriots are really in a league of their own:

(click to enlarge)

Could the Patriots be so good that they just defy the numbers? As my friend theorized: Perhaps they’ve invented a revolutionary in-house way to protect the ball, or perhaps they’ve intentionally stocked their skill positions with players who don’t have a propensity to fumble. Or perhaps still, they call plays which intentionally result in a lower percentage of fumbles. Or maybe its just that they play with deflated footballs on offense. It could be any combination of the above.

But regardless of what, specifically, is causing these numbers, the fact remains: this is an extremely abnormal occurrence and is NOT simply random fluctuation.

_____________________________________

UPDATE: It was suggested that I look at ALL fumbles, not just fumbles lost. With that said, let’s look there:

First, it should be noted (as the tables above show) that teams playing indoors fumble the ball less frequently. Reasons are many, foremost the ball won’t be wet from precipitation, damp from late night condensation, and a variety of other reasons. Which is why, if you look at the very first chart I posted above, you’ll see the teams who fumble the MOST/play are generally colder weather teams who play outdoors (PHI, DEN, BUF, PIT, WAS, NYG, KC, NYJ). Whereas at the other end of the spectrum, aside from the Patriots in their own world, are HOU, ATL and NO, all dome teams.

The below graphic looks at ALL fumbles over 5 year periods the last 25 years. I planned to cut this off at JUST the top 10 teams, but all we would have seen were the Patriots and dome teams. Top 15 would have accomplished the same. So I had to expand to the top 25 team periods. As you can see, of the top 25 team-periods, 17 are dome teams, including 11 of the top 15. First, let’s look at the chart, then we’ll look at comparisons to average:

(click to enlarge)

As is apparent, the Patriots are the only outdoor NFL team the last 25 years to average 70 plays/fumble or better, and they did it from 2007-2014 (four, five year periods). Its simply uncanny, as the statistics above similarly showed.

Averages:

• Over the last 25 years, indoor teams averaged 43 plays/fumble (in all games they played that season, regardless of site, understanding that half their games would be played indoor sans-weather).
• Since 2000, they improved to 46 plays/fumble.
• Over the last 25 years, outdoor teams averaged 41 plays/fumble.
• Since 2000, they improved to 43 plays/fumble.

The Patriots averaged 73 plays/fumble the past 5 years, almost 70% better than the 43 plays/fumble that outdoor teams averaged since 2000.

Next, lets look only at the current 5 year period:

The league average plays per fumble from 2010 thru 2014 was 50 plays/fumble.

• For indoor teams, the average was 55 plays/fumble.
• For outdoor teams, excluding the Patriots, the average was 46 plays/fumble (9 fewer).

The Patriots averaged 73 plays/fumble, almost 60% MORE than outdoor teams, and almost 50% MORE than the league average the past 5 years.

(click to enlarge)

Since we now can clearly in the data, both near term and long term, that dome-based teams (who play at least 8 games out of the elements) have an advantage in the fumble department, we can exclude them from comparisons to the Patriots.

If we do, I can produce a chart identical to the one at the very top which looked ONLY at fumbles lost. This one looks at ALL fumbles, whether lost or recovered. I think the point still remains:

(click to enlarge)

If this chart looks nearly identical, it should. The Patriots are so “off the map” when it comes to either fumbles or only fumbles lost. As mentioned earlier: this is an extremely abnormal occurrence and is NOT simply random fluctuation.

Maybe the 3rd time this will take.

People are having a hard time grasping the timeline and why the Pats altering the ball would be a big deal.

There's no way there that article is going to take.

It is getting decent buzz around the internet, the site has been hammered all day.

 

[MG345]

From King's Report

• The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge at halftime. I am told either 11 or 12 of New England’s footballs (ESPN’s Chris Mortensen reported it was 11, and I hear it could have been all 12) had at least two pounds less pressure in them. All 12 Indianapolis footballs were at the prescribed level.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge after the game. All 24 checked at the correct pressure—which is one of the last pieces of the puzzle the league needed to determine with certainty that something fishy happened with the Patriots footballs, because the Colts’ balls stayed correctly inflated for the nearly four hours. There had been reports quoting atmospheric experts that cold weather could deflate footballs. But if the Patriots’ balls were all low, and the Colts’ balls all legit, that quashes that theory.

He uses the phrase "were checked by pressure gauge" twice, both in referring to halftime, and after the game, but not in reference to the pregame check. Why make that specific distinction twice but not three times?

Saying they all left the inspection between the proper ranges implies that not only were they checked, they were legal.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

We need to make a list of things that slightly deflated footballs cause

1) prevention of fumbles

2) people to lose their ####### mind

3)

3) Tom Brady to laugh dismissively

 

[Run It Up]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

Thats weird cause before King reported it, it was reported that they simply "passed inspection". Then a day later they "passed proper inspection", then King says they were between 12.5 and 13.5.

Yet theres absolutely no mention from someone who would know, or someone pretending to know that they were actually checked with pressure gauges before the game. Simply that they were approved, and now King choosing to - states them as being 12.5 - 13.5.

Because why would they check for something, they never check for?

 

[Niles Standish]

Here's a question though. Cold weather teams fumble more. But cold weather teams also (assuming on average everyone starts at the same inflation) have less inflation due to temperature.

Some science guy help me out with this one.

 

[Flying Elvis]

We need to make a list of things that slightly deflated footballs cause

1) prevention of fumbles

2) people to lose their ####### mind

3)

3) Tom Brady to laugh dismissively

4) 179 wins during the Brady era

 

[parrot]

From King's Report

• The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge at halftime. I am told either 11 or 12 of New England’s footballs (ESPN’s Chris Mortensen reported it was 11, and I hear it could have been all 12) had at least two pounds less pressure in them. All 12 Indianapolis footballs were at the prescribed level.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge after the game. All 24 checked at the correct pressure—which is one of the last pieces of the puzzle the league needed to determine with certainty that something fishy happened with the Patriots footballs, because the Colts’ balls stayed correctly inflated for the nearly four hours. There had been reports quoting atmospheric experts that cold weather could deflate footballs. But if the Patriots’ balls were all low, and the Colts’ balls all legit, that quashes that theory.

He uses the phrase "were checked by pressure gauge" twice, both in referring to halftime, and after the game, but not in reference to the pregame check. Why make that specific distinction twice but not three times?

Saying they all left the inspection between the proper ranges implies that not only were they checked, they were legal.

It does imply it, but why specify it twice and not all three times?

 

[RenegadeRoy]

We need to make a list of things that slightly deflated footballs cause

1) prevention of fumbles

2) people to lose their ####### mind

3)

3) Tom Brady to laugh dismissively

4) 179 wins during the Brady era

5) The haters to become salty

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/NEW-Fumble-Chart-3.png

That site has been down most of the afternoon, after it got posted on Reddit. Here is a mirror (sort of): http://i.imgur.com/7VtMGwg.jpg

link to reddit thread?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

Thats weird cause before King reported it, it was reported that they simply "passed inspection". Then a day later they "passed proper inspection", then King says they were between 12.5 and 13.5.

Yet theres absolutely no mention from someone who would know, or someone pretending to know that they were actually checked with pressure gauges before the game. Simply that they were approved, and now King choosing to - states them as being 12.5 - 13.5.

Because why would they check for something, they never check for?

From the NFL's statement:

The investigation began based on information that suggested that the game balls used by the New England Patriots were not properly inflated to levels required by the playing rules, specifically Playing Rule 2, Section 1, which requires that the ball be inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 pounds per square inch. Prior to the game, the game officials inspect the footballs to be used by each team and confirm that this standard is satisfied, which was done before last Sunday’s game.

 

[the moops]

We need to make a list of things that slightly deflated footballs cause

1) prevention of fumbles

2) people to lose their ####### mind

3)

3) Tom Brady to laugh dismissively

4) 179 wins during the Brady era

5) normally sane posters that I like to start sounding like jon_mx in a global warming thread

 

[MG345]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

Thats weird cause before King reported it, it was reported that they simply "passed inspection". Then a day later they "passed proper inspection", then King says they were between 12.5 and 13.5.

Yet theres absolutely no mention from someone who would know, or someone pretending to know that they were actually checked with pressure gauges before the game. Simply that they were approved, and now King choosing to - states them as being 12.5 - 13.5.

Because why would they check for something, they never check for?

You make no sense, and seem to be literally going backwards in this argument.

 

[RUSF18]

From King's Report

• The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge at halftime. I am told either 11 or 12 of New England’s footballs (ESPN’s Chris Mortensen reported it was 11, and I hear it could have been all 12) had at least two pounds less pressure in them. All 12 Indianapolis footballs were at the prescribed level.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge after the game. All 24 checked at the correct pressure—which is one of the last pieces of the puzzle the league needed to determine with certainty that something fishy happened with the Patriots footballs, because the Colts’ balls stayed correctly inflated for the nearly four hours. There had been reports quoting atmospheric experts that cold weather could deflate footballs. But if the Patriots’ balls were all low, and the Colts’ balls all legit, that quashes that theory.

He uses the phrase "were checked by pressure gauge" twice, both in referring to halftime, and after the game, but not in reference to the pregame check. Why make that specific distinction twice but not three times?

Probably because he's a football writer and not a Supreme Court Justice rendering an opinion.

 

[moleculo]

I think it's pretty obvious that the refs did not gauge the balls pre-game. They simply gave them the 'ol Charmin Squeeze.

 

[TobiasFunke]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

Thats weird cause before King reported it, it was reported that they simply "passed inspection". Then a day later they "passed proper inspection", then King says they were between 12.5 and 13.5.

Yet theres absolutely no mention from someone who would know, or someone pretending to know that they were actually checked with pressure gauges before the game. Simply that they were approved, and now King choosing to - states them as being 12.5 - 13.5.

Because why would they check for something, they never check for?

Stop embarrassing yourself

 

[Dr. Octopus]

We need to make a list of things that slightly deflated footballs cause

1) prevention of fumbles

2) people to lose their ####### mind

3)

3) Tom Brady to laugh dismissively

4) 179 wins during the Brady era

5) The haters to become salty

6) Rocket to insist that the standard of proof in this investigation be more stringent than the standard in a murder trial (true story)

 

[MG345]

From King's Report

• The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge at halftime. I am told either 11 or 12 of New England’s footballs (ESPN’s Chris Mortensen reported it was 11, and I hear it could have been all 12) had at least two pounds less pressure in them. All 12 Indianapolis footballs were at the prescribed level.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge after the game. All 24 checked at the correct pressure—which is one of the last pieces of the puzzle the league needed to determine with certainty that something fishy happened with the Patriots footballs, because the Colts’ balls stayed correctly inflated for the nearly four hours. There had been reports quoting atmospheric experts that cold weather could deflate footballs. But if the Patriots’ balls were all low, and the Colts’ balls all legit, that quashes that theory.

He uses the phrase "were checked by pressure gauge" twice, both in referring to halftime, and after the game, but not in reference to the pregame check. Why make that specific distinction twice but not three times?

Saying they all left the inspection between the proper ranges implies that not only were they checked, they were legal.

It does imply it, but why specify it twice and not all three times?

They are specifying it when they say they were in the proper range. Stop being daft.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/NEW-Fumble-Chart-3.png

That site has been down most of the afternoon, after it got posted on Reddit. Here is a mirror (sort of): http://i.imgur.com/7VtMGwg.jpg

link to reddit thread?

http://www.reddit.com/r/Seahawks/comments/2tdpq2/new_englands_miraculously_low_fumble_rate/

 

[stbugs]

Colts balls were at 14 PSI. Close enough to the 13.5 that the officials didn't care. Pats balls were at 12 PSI. Close enough that officials didn't care.

All balls lose 1.5 PSI due to conditions. Colts balls are at 12.5, and deemed within the acceptable range. Pats balls are down to 10.5 PSI, which is the 2 PSI difference from acceptable.

I'm just making #### up obviously.

That's not what happened though, there was no significant loss of PSI on the Colts' balls. If all the balls PSI dropped an even amount, this wouldn't be an issue. Hell, the 12 balls from NE didn't deflate at a common rate so that even points further to tampering.

The only way the Colts balls didn't see a deflation is if there wasn't any. No deflation means they did not see a temperature drop. It's basic physics, people, you can't really work around this.

The reason the Colts balls did not see a temperature drop is because they were checked at halftime at the same temperature they were checked at pre-game - i.e. in the warmth and comfort of the officials locker room.

Therefore, we can surmise that the temperature differential played no role in any loss of pressure, Colts balls or Patriots balls.

Which leaves open the question - what happened to the 2 PSI in the patriots balls?

How much of this is fact? Do we actually know where the balls at halftime were measured and the exact pressures? When people say the Colts balls were in spec, does that actually mean there was no delfation or that they started at the high end and were still within the low end?

we don't know, all we can do is surmise based on the (shoddy) information at hand.

With what we know now, there's at least 1 psi unaccounted for from the Patriots balls, possibly over 2 PSI (depending on various measuring conditions).

Those PSI could be from the patriots staff submitting under-inflated balls to the refs (intentionally or not), who failed to fully inspect them, or the PSI may be missing due to post-inspection modification.

Got it, thanks. It would be nice to just get the details, then again, you know where I stand on this, non-issue IMHO especially since the balls were replaced.

 

[Run It Up]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

Thats weird cause before King reported it, it was reported that they simply "passed inspection". Then a day later they "passed proper inspection", then King says they were between 12.5 and 13.5.Yet theres absolutely no mention from someone who would know, or someone pretending to know that they were actually checked with pressure gauges before the game. Simply that they were approved, and now King choosing to - states them as being 12.5 - 13.5.

Because why would they check for something, they never check for?

From the NFL's statement:

The investigation began based on information that suggested that the game balls used by the New England Patriots were not properly inflated to levels required by the playing rules, specifically Playing Rule 2, Section 1, which requires that the ball be inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 pounds per square inch. Prior to the game, the game officials inspect the footballs to be used by each team and confirm that this standard is satisfied, which was done before last Sundays game.

Still seeing no mention of instruments. A ball boy and a ref have both said it's common practice to not actual measure the psi.

 

[Niles Standish]

We need to make a list of things that slightly deflated footballs cause

1) prevention of fumbles

2) people to lose their ####### mind

3)

3) Tom Brady to laugh dismissively

4) 179 wins during the Brady era

Yup they'd be 0-207 if they weren't deflating balls.

 

[skinsrule05]

Love how you didn't include ALL the former NFL coaches/players who've said it's no big deal. Nice cherry picking.

I didn't cherry pick anything. All of what I included was in one article. There wasn't anything in the article saying it wasn't a big deal. Read it yourself, wiseass.

Poor research on your part then. There's been plenty of people who've came out and said its no big deal.

Poor research? I wasn't researching anything. I was reading news articles, and that one was listed with others. I thought it was relevant to this thread so I posted it. Did you read the article, because it is more about these people saying they don't believe Tom Brady than saying it is a big deal. Personally, I don't believe Brady either. He would immediately know the difference in the feel of the ball. Do I think it is a big deal? I think it is par for the course with the Patriots.

Brady has a wet ball for 3 seconds at a time with a 300lb lineman coming his way on every play. You seriously think he has time to think about whether the ball is underinflated by 2 PSI?? lol. We've got some winners here.

You are thinking about it like a viewer who may throw around a football every now and then. The NY Post had a good article that gave these comparisons:

- a pro golfer can tell the difference of 1 degree loft on their clubs

- a baseball player will know if there is a 1" or 1oz difference in their bat

- a basketball player will know if the rim is off by an inch from 10'

- a hockey player will know after one shot if the bend of his stick is off.

These professionals spend thousands of hours working with their equipment. They know it inside and out. Yet one of the best QBs in the game doesn't know when his ball pressure is off by 16%. That is like a baseball player grabbing a bat that is 6" longer then he expected and not noticing.

 

[parrot]

From King's Report

• The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials’ locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge at halftime. I am told either 11 or 12 of New England’s footballs (ESPN’s Chris Mortensen reported it was 11, and I hear it could have been all 12) had at least two pounds less pressure in them. All 12 Indianapolis footballs were at the prescribed level.

• All 24 footballs were checked by pressure gauge after the game. All 24 checked at the correct pressure—which is one of the last pieces of the puzzle the league needed to determine with certainty that something fishy happened with the Patriots footballs, because the Colts’ balls stayed correctly inflated for the nearly four hours. There had been reports quoting atmospheric experts that cold weather could deflate footballs. But if the Patriots’ balls were all low, and the Colts’ balls all legit, that quashes that theory.

He uses the phrase "were checked by pressure gauge" twice, both in referring to halftime, and after the game, but not in reference to the pregame check. Why make that specific distinction twice but not three times?

Probably because he's a football writer and not a Supreme Court Justice rendering an opinion.

Maybe it's just that. Or maybe his sources are able to a lot more "reliably" report on what happened with the later inspections and not so much the first one? Most writers would avoid repeating a specific phrase in that short a span, unless they were really trying to stress a point, and if you're really trying to stress that point, why not stress it everywhere it applies.

 

[MG345]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

Thats weird cause before King reported it, it was reported that they simply "passed inspection". Then a day later they "passed proper inspection", then King says they were between 12.5 and 13.5.Yet theres absolutely no mention from someone who would know, or someone pretending to know that they were actually checked with pressure gauges before the game. Simply that they were approved, and now King choosing to - states them as being 12.5 - 13.5.

Because why would they check for something, they never check for?

From the NFL's statement:

The investigation began based on information that suggested that the game balls used by the New England Patriots were not properly inflated to levels required by the playing rules, specifically Playing Rule 2, Section 1, which requires that the ball be inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 pounds per square inch. Prior to the game, the game officials inspect the footballs to be used by each team and confirm that this standard is satisfied, which was done before last Sundays game.

Still seeing no mention of instruments. A ball boy and a ref have both said it's common practice to not actual measure the psi.

"The standard is satisfied" implies they actually checked the pressure, in order to do that properly you need a gauge. As to your other statement, anecdotal evidence of another game has no bearing on this situation.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

1. Balls were tested pregame and all 24 were in the proper range.

Well that didn't take long, the balls were approved, that is the extent of all we know about that specifically.

Here's the full text from King:

The 12 footballs used in the first half for New England, and the 12 footballs used by the Colts, all left the officials locker room before the game at the prescribed pressure level of between 12.5 pounds per square inch and 13.5 psi.

Thats weird cause before King reported it, it was reported that they simply "passed inspection". Then a day later they "passed proper inspection", then King says they were between 12.5 and 13.5.Yet theres absolutely no mention from someone who would know, or someone pretending to know that they were actually checked with pressure gauges before the game. Simply that they were approved, and now King choosing to - states them as being 12.5 - 13.5.

Because why would they check for something, they never check for?

From the NFL's statement:

The investigation began based on information that suggested that the game balls used by the New England Patriots were not properly inflated to levels required by the playing rules, specifically Playing Rule 2, Section 1, which requires that the ball be inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 pounds per square inch. Prior to the game, the game officials inspect the footballs to be used by each team and confirm that this standard is satisfied, which was done before last Sundays game.

Still seeing no mention of instruments. A ball boy and a ref have both said it's common practice to not actual measure the psi.

I'm just going by what the NFL has said in it's statement and through King's leak - it seems that they are strongly implying that the procedure was proper, but sure we don't know that 100% yet.