Patriots being investigated after Colts game (3 Viewers)

[Godsbrother]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxsXFX3tDpg

The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true.

Again, this isn't actually "science." These individuals don't show how they dropped the temperature (how fast/slow), and soaking footballs in water isn't the same as having them get rained on and dried off (and repeating the process, over and over). This is a youtube video that may/may not be based on a legitimate scientific test, but this video, in and of itself, isn't science. Saying it is doesn't make it so.

I think I read somewhere that it takes about 30 minutes for a room temperature football to cool down to 50 degrees or so (reach equilibrium). If the football was wet (and it was), it should reach equilibrium faster because water conducts heat faster than air. Like how 72 degree air feels comfortable, but 72 degree water feels cold.

The HeadSmart experiment isn't exactly like the game conditions, but it is fairly close. At this point, we are arguing over minor differences. For example, I could easily argue that every measurement of PSI by the refs drops the PSI: each time you stick in the gauge, the football lets out air and makes a brief whooshing noise. How many times did the refs check the PSI of Patriots balls? That could make the PSI lower than what the HeadSmart video shows.

Not arguing over minor differences, as I previously noted, that video may be based on a legitimate scientific experiment. The video itself, however, isn't "science," and as such the post/argument that "the science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't make it true" is flawed at it's very concept. I've seen numerous people trying to use science to prove their point on BOTH sides of this debate. Your statement that "arguing with my science doesn't make it true" could be made by people on the other side of the debate who have "science" that they believes supports their position. As far as I've seen, there isn't any "science" that seems to be totally conclusive.

One of the purposes of a scientific experiment is to be open about your methodology, so other people can test and refine the experiment.

I agree that the HeadSmart experiment does not perfectly reflect game conditions. But can you point to any experiment that improves on the flaws, and does not create other flaws? Just saying that an experiment is not perfect, does not mean you have disproved the underlying conclusion.

Bill Nye and Neil Tyson are scientists, but they did not run their own experiments disproving the HeadSmart video, so they have no basis to dispute it. Actually, they've made factually incorrect statements about temperature not affecting PSI and the 15% PSI difference.

I never said I disproved the underlying conclusion. I said that video isn't any kind of "science" that can't be argued with. In fact, I specifically said the video may be based on a perfectly legitimate experiment.

Generally, if someone wants to argue science, I hope they have competing evidence to argue with. Otherwise, what's their point?

Btw, when I said in Post #5227: "The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true." that was in response to someone who said: "I think the whole thing is silly but don't blame the weather."

Someone who says the weather didn't affect PSI is factually incorrect. Because the science shows that weather does affect PSI. I don't think there is any legitimate argument about that.

I didn't say that. What I said was don't blame the weather cause it sure doesn't look like the NFL is. They could have easily put an end to this ridiculousness if they just came out and said the balls were deflated because of a temperature drop. Bam, there goes the entire controversy.

Since they have not I assume that they have already considered weather as a factor and dismissed it. Perhaps they measured again at the same temperature they were originally checked at and the balls were still low. Maybe the temperature of the location they measured wasn't significantly different than the outside weather. Perhaps the balls weren't in the cold long enough to drop the pressure that much. Who the hell knows?

Maybe someone should just point the NFL to all of the scientific analysis done in this thread and we can move forward and start talking about the game.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

 

[mbuehner]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

Read the other hundred pages of this thread if you want to know. You havent magically cracked a code the rest of us dont know about.

 

[espnespn]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Unless we have proof that the Patriots balls were over 3 PSI under-inflated, anyone who understands the Ideal Gas Law knows that it would have been impossible for the Patriots to deflate the balls by 2 PSI before the game, because the cold weather would have dropped that PSI even lower.

25.2 * ((50+459.67)/(72+459.67)) = 24.15. Subtract 14.7 from 24.15 and you get 9.45 PSI.

So dropping from 72 degrees to 50 degrees means a 10.5 PSI starting ball drops to 9.5 PSI.

 

[GoBirds]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Common sense is frowned upon here.

 

[12punch]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Common sense is frowned upon here.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

FWIW, this came out a few days ago.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

But what has the NFL really found? As one league source has explained it to PFT, the football intercepted by Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson was roughly two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum. The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI.

The NFL has yet to share specific information regarding the PSI measurements of the balls that were confiscated and measured at halftime. Which has allowed the perception of cheating to linger, fueled by the confirmation from Friday that the NFL found underinflated balls, but that the NFL still doesn’t know how they came to be that way

 

[TobiasFunke]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

Read the other hundred pages of this thread if you want to know. You havent magically cracked a code the rest of us dont know about.

A hundred pages of football fans arguing with each other is gonna cloud the truth, not reveal it.

Trusted journalists have reported what I posted as the facts. You told me that what I posted was "factually incorrect." If you can back up that assertion with something from a similarly trusted source of news or agreed-upon facts, go for it. Otherwise, admit that you can't. Don't back it up with a reading assignment.

 

[mbuehner]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

Read the other hundred pages of this thread if you want to know. You havent magically cracked a code the rest of us dont know about.

A hundred pages of football fans arguing with each other is gonna cloud the truth, not reveal it.

Trusted journalists have reported what I posted as the facts. You told me that what I posted was "factually incorrect." If you can back up that assertion with something from a similarly trusted source of news or agreed-upon facts, go for it. Otherwise, admit that you can't. Don't back it up with a reading assignment.

Fine: "The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

Now shut up.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

FWIW, this came out a few days ago.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

But what has the NFL really found? As one league source has explained it to PFT, the football intercepted by Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson was roughly two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum. The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI.

The NFL has yet to share specific information regarding the PSI measurements of the balls that were confiscated and measured at halftime. Which has allowed the perception of cheating to linger, fueled by the confirmation from Friday that the NFL found underinflated balls, but that the NFL still doesn’t know how they came to be that way

Thanks. So on the one hand you've got Peter King providing information that he was "told reliably" and that he hasn't backed down from. On the other hand you've got a single unnamed source telling a far less reliable Mike Florio that "maybe" it was closer to 1 psi under 12.5, ... which could still mean a loss of at least two pounds of pressure, depending on the starting point and what "closer to 1 psi" means (could be 1.4 under 12.5, or 11.1).

I know what narrative I believe. But I agree that the lack of info from the NFL has clouded things.

 

[parrot]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

King seems to be getting the 11 of 12 from Mortenson. How much else is he taking from Mortenson?

Mort uses ESPN Radio 810 out of Kansas City as a source for the Colts balls having been checked. Of course that same report claims that the Pats original balls were reinflated for the second half. This claim is at odds with what most other outlets - including Patriots spokesman Stacey James - have reported, which is that the Pats used replacement balls in the second half. There is a lot of questionable reporting going on.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

Seemed to me Peter King has backed up a good deal since his article on Monday, both in print and on TV.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.

-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

Read the other hundred pages of this thread if you want to know. You havent magically cracked a code the rest of us dont know about.

A hundred pages of football fans arguing with each other is gonna cloud the truth, not reveal it.

Trusted journalists have reported what I posted as the facts. You told me that what I posted was "factually incorrect." If you can back up that assertion with something from a similarly trusted source of news or agreed-upon facts, go for it. Otherwise, admit that you can't. Don't back it up with a reading assignment.

Fine: "The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

Now shut up.

Thanks. So when you said my post based on King's reporting was "factually incorrect," what you mean was that there was another report that could possibly be in conflict with the King report was couched in hedged language ("may have been") and that also confused reports of a two psi reduction with being two psi under the mandatory pressure? Is that accurate?

Why so rude? Truth hurts or something like that?

 

[mbuehner]

You also have other sources saying that the back up balls that had been kept indoors were measured, found to be fine, and used after halftime.

King maintains the original balls were reinflated.

There are conflicting leaks, which isnt surprising from dueling unnamed sources. This case hinges on details, and playing the telephone game with sources of unknown proximity to the investigation is going to cause problems.

 

[General Tso]

Why'd the guy from Wilson say the weather couldn't have done it?

Because he is a moron who works at their traveling booth to show how the balls are made. Do you think that is where they send their scientists....do you think Wilson has scientists?

Morton, I think you've hot on the heart of the issue with this whole sordid mess. I honestly don't think anyone - the NFL, the officials, the fans, the folks at Wilson - fully understood and appreciated the science behind naturally occurring pressure losses in footballs. I don't think Bill Belichik even understood or appreciated it either. The Pats, and their fans, being the ones accused, have had to learn about this issue, while by and large the rest of the country has dismissed good science and a very likely explanation without ever even giving it a chance. And it hasn't helped that our lazy, brain dead media hasn't contributed or helped foster an honest inquiry into this either. Guys like NDT and Bill Nye have done both themselves and science a huge disservice by knowingly commenting on only small parts of this issue while not coming out and publicly clarifying that it is not only possible, it is scientific fact that balls will deflate by up to 1 psi given the weather conditions in play that night. ESPN ran the Bill Nye segment all weekend - played it over and over and over. And the only bit of scientific evidence supporting the Pats was only posted on the website, and even then it was taken down after only 24 hours. When Pats fans complained, ESPN acknowledged the fairness and put it back up.People are lazy in America. They get their news from TV. But unfortunately TV news isn't a source of education or truth anymore, and it hasn't been for decades. The news media is one thing anyone thing only - entertainment. ESPN isn't concerned with the truth. Their primary objective is getting viewers, and in today's world viewers tune in when there is something easy to understand, selacious, and controversial. Truth and science generally don't fit we'll within that framework.

A lot of you won't believe this, but I am much more interested in the truth here than proving the Pats are innocent. But I want that truth pursued in a manner that is fair, and this whole process has been grossly unfair and extremely biased against the Pats. This investigation should have been conducted behind the scenes, with no leaks until an NFL finding was made. And then the evidence should have been laid out in a report easily accessible by everyone, so people could have read the evidence and made up their own mind. Instead, the NFL and the media have taken a posture of guilty until proven innocent, and dragged the team through the mud at a time when it disadvantaged them while trying to prepare for the Superbowl. If the Pats are innocent, and there's a very good chance they are, then they were royally screwed here. The news has already tried and convicted them, and that's all most people will remember, even if they are later proved innocent. As someone once said, "Where do I go to get my reputation back?"

 

[Run It Up]

Why'd the guy from Wilson say the weather couldn't have done it?

Cause he's dumb?

 

[12punch]

It's a good illustration of how sensitive fumble data is to small changes. If you take out the Lawfirm, Pats players actually fumble at a lower rate after leaving NE than before (105 touches/fumble in NE, 110 touches/fumble after).

http://soshcentral.com/football-science/football-statistics/2015/01/27/fumbling-data-truth-patriots-fumble-rate/

 

[TobiasFunke]

You also have other sources saying that the back up balls that had been kept indoors were measured, found to be fine, and used after halftime.

King maintains the original balls were reinflated.

There are conflicting leaks, which isnt surprising from dueling unnamed sources. This case hinges on details, and playing the telephone game with sources of unknown proximity to the investigation is going to cause problems.

Except that you didn't say that there were "conflicting leaks" of that some minor detail of King's report regarding the balls used after the deflation was discovered casts some doubt on his account in your opinion. You said I was "factually incorrect." Then you told me to shut up. Just wondering why you're so absolutely certain that King's account is completely wrong and the facts as you understand them are correct and there's no room for discussion.

 

[General Tso]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Tobias coming late to the party. Must not have seen the Florio report from Saturday, corroborated by others, that completely debunked the original Mort report you are citing that the balls were off by at least 2 psi. It's more like 1 psi - oh, except for the all that was in the Colts possession - that one mysteriously was the only one greater than 2 psi. Hmmm, investigation coming on that? Wonder if the NFL is looking at videos of the Colts ball boys on their sidelines...Might want to catch up... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

 

[Morton Muffley]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

FWIW, this came out a few days ago.http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

But what has the NFL really found? As one league source has explained it to PFT, the football intercepted by Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson was roughly two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum. The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI.

The NFL has yet to share specific information regarding the PSI measurements of the balls that were confiscated and measured at halftime. Which has allowed the perception of cheating to linger, fueled by the confirmation from Friday that the NFL found underinflated balls, but that the NFL still doesn’t know how they came to be that way

Thanks. So on the one hand you've got Peter King providing information that he was "told reliably" and that he hasn't backed down from. On the other hand you've got a single unnamed source telling a far less reliable Mike Florio that "maybe" it was closer to 1 psi under 12.5, ... which could still mean a loss of at least two pounds of pressure, depending on the starting point and what "closer to 1 psi" means (could be 1.4 under 12.5, or 11.1).

I know what narrative I believe. But I agree that the lack of info from the NFL has clouded things.

Yep, we all know what narrative you believe. And for the record the patriots defenders on here didn't choose florid over king because it supported their narrative. They are trusting florid over king because florio's leak was an update on info they were previously relying (first morts and then king's). But as time has moved forward some of us are updating our thinking with that new info. Unfortunately not all of us are.

In addition, it is clear to me that sides are being taken on this based on perceptions of competence/incompetence. Specifically, I see gods brother stating that obviously if this were simply explained by weather then the nfl would have already put this issue to bed. But this assumes that the nfl is running a competent inquiry...many of us feel quite the opposite.

All of us are bringing biases to this data. Here are mine:

I do NOT believe the patriots have a history/culture of cheating

I believe many others wrongly understand the spy gate wrongdoing

I do NOT believe that the NFL is running a competent investigation

I do believe that Kraft and BB have been so surprisingly adamant, confrontational, and unconditional that they must be very confident that they did nothing wrong

Lastly I have what I call a media maxim that I follow and it goes like this: I believe that nearly all journalists are bad at math/science and that sports journalists are also bad at journalism.

I am sure I have other biases so don't mistake this as an exhaustive list but know that I do try very hard to investigate how my biases may be negatively impacting my conclusions. In this way I attempt to neutralizes my biases...though admittedly not always as effectively as I would like.

So, what your biases?

 

[General Tso]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Everything you just said is factually incorrect. Aside from it not being a criminal case.-The NFL reported the balls were 'inspected' pregame, not measured.

- The latest leak says the ball the Colts intercepted was 2 psi under, the others were closer to 1psi.

- We have no idea if the Colts balls were ever measured, pre game or halftime, or if they were filled indoors or outdoors, or if they were stored indoors or outdoors, or how long they sat indoors IF they were measured.

Really?

This is still up. No corrections to it. It says everything I said- balls measured (as would be needed to establish they were in the acceptable psi range), 11 of the 12 balls had lost "at least 2 psi," Colts balls were correctly inflated both pre and post game.

You can choose to believe whatever second-hand leaks some Boston talk radio loudmouth feeds you if you like. I'll stick with King's report until someone I trust contradicts it and puts their name on that contradiction. Maybe I've missed some development along those lines? If so feel free to point it out

FWIW, this came out a few days ago.http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

But what has the NFL really found? As one league source has explained it to PFT, the football intercepted by Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson was roughly two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum. The other 10 balls that reportedly were two pounds under may have been, as the source explained it, closer to one pound below 12.5 PSI.

The NFL has yet to share specific information regarding the PSI measurements of the balls that were confiscated and measured at halftime. Which has allowed the perception of cheating to linger, fueled by the confirmation from Friday that the NFL found underinflated balls, but that the NFL still doesn’t know how they came to be that way

Thanks. So on the one hand you've got Peter King providing information that he was "told reliably" and that he hasn't backed down from. On the other hand you've got a single unnamed source telling a far less reliable Mike Florio that "maybe" it was closer to 1 psi under 12.5, ... which could still mean a loss of at least two pounds of pressure, depending on the starting point and what "closer to 1 psi" means (could be 1.4 under 12.5, or 11.1).

I know what narrative I believe. But I agree that the lack of info from the NFL has clouded things.

Yep, we all know what narrative you believe. And for the record the patriots defenders on here didn't choose florid over king because it supported their narrative. They are trusting florid over king because florio's leak was an update on info they were previously relying (first morts and then king's). But as time has moved forward some of us are updating our thinking with that new info. Unfortunately not all of us are.

In addition, it is clear to me that sides are being taken on this based on perceptions of competence/incompetence. Specifically, I see gods brother stating that obviously if this were simply explained by weather then the nfl would have already put this issue to bed. But this assumes that the nfl is running a competent inquiry...many of us feel quite the opposite.

All of us are bringing biases to this data. Here are mine:

I do NOT believe the patriots have a history/culture of cheating

I believe many others wrongly understand the spy gate wrongdoing

I do NOT believe that the NFL is running a competent investigation

I do believe that Kraft and BB have been so surprisingly adamant, confrontational, and unconditional that they must be very confident that they did nothing wrong

Lastly I have what I call a media maxim that I follow and it goes like this: I believe that nearly all journalists are bad at math/science and that sports journalists are also bad at journalism.

I am sure I have other biases so don't mistake this as an exhaustive list but know that I do try very hard to investigate how my biases may be negatively impacting my conclusions. In this way I attempt to neutralizes my biases...though admittedly not always as effectively as I would like.

So, what your biases?

He's completely biased. He has said earlier in this thread that there is only one explanation for a drop in air pressure - Pats cheating. His mind was made up before the story even broke. He has no interest in having a serious debate on this subject, so my advice would be not to engage him on that level.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Tobias coming late to the party. Must not have seen the Florio report from Saturday, corroborated by others, that completely debunked the original Mort report you are citing that the balls were off by at least 2 psi. It's more like 1 psi - oh, except for the all that was in the Colts possession - that one mysteriously was the only one greater than 2 psi. Hmmm, investigation coming on that? Wonder if the NFL is looking at videos of the Colts ball boys on their sidelines...Might want to catch up... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

Thanks. I addressed every word in my other posts above ... including the distinction many including you seem to be missing between losing at least 2 psi and being "closer to 1 psi" under the minimum. Both could technically be true (1.4 is "closer to 1," and 11.1 could easily be a loss of "at least 2 psi" from whatever the baseline). And even if not, we're talking about very small discrepancies. Everyone seems to agree that the Pats balls lost significant pressure and came in well under the minimum at halftime. Also, nobody has disputed the account that the Colts' balls were fine pregame, at halftime and after the game, which seems to invalidate the possibility that the Pats balls lost pressure due to the weather, leaving us with no other reasonable explanation that I've heard for the discrepancy.

For me that's enough to cast quite a bit of suspicion on the Pats. I'm not certain they cheated, but it seems the most likely explanation, and that's really all I care about. I'm sure Pats fans disagree, but I'm not sure why, and I don't know how many non-Pats fans disagree.

 

[Bayhawks]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxsXFX3tDpg

The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true.

Again, this isn't actually "science." These individuals don't show how they dropped the temperature (how fast/slow), and soaking footballs in water isn't the same as having them get rained on and dried off (and repeating the process, over and over). This is a youtube video that may/may not be based on a legitimate scientific test, but this video, in and of itself, isn't science. Saying it is doesn't make it so.

I think I read somewhere that it takes about 30 minutes for a room temperature football to cool down to 50 degrees or so (reach equilibrium). If the football was wet (and it was), it should reach equilibrium faster because water conducts heat faster than air. Like how 72 degree air feels comfortable, but 72 degree water feels cold.

The HeadSmart experiment isn't exactly like the game conditions, but it is fairly close. At this point, we are arguing over minor differences. For example, I could easily argue that every measurement of PSI by the refs drops the PSI: each time you stick in the gauge, the football lets out air and makes a brief whooshing noise. How many times did the refs check the PSI of Patriots balls? That could make the PSI lower than what the HeadSmart video shows.

Not arguing over minor differences, as I previously noted, that video may be based on a legitimate scientific experiment. The video itself, however, isn't "science," and as such the post/argument that "the science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't make it true" is flawed at it's very concept. I've seen numerous people trying to use science to prove their point on BOTH sides of this debate. Your statement that "arguing with my science doesn't make it true" could be made by people on the other side of the debate who have "science" that they believes supports their position. As far as I've seen, there isn't any "science" that seems to be totally conclusive.

One of the purposes of a scientific experiment is to be open about your methodology, so other people can test and refine the experiment.

I agree that the HeadSmart experiment does not perfectly reflect game conditions. But can you point to any experiment that improves on the flaws, and does not create other flaws? Just saying that an experiment is not perfect, does not mean you have disproved the underlying conclusion.

Bill Nye and Neil Tyson are scientists, but they did not run their own experiments disproving the HeadSmart video, so they have no basis to dispute it. Actually, they've made factually incorrect statements about temperature not affecting PSI and the 15% PSI difference.

I never said I disproved the underlying conclusion. I said that video isn't any kind of "science" that can't be argued with. In fact, I specifically said the video may be based on a perfectly legitimate experiment.

Generally, if someone wants to argue science, I hope they have competing evidence to argue with. Otherwise, what's their point?

Btw, when I said in Post #5227: "The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true." that was in response to someone who said: "I think the whole thing is silly but don't blame the weather."

Someone who says the weather didn't affect PSI is factually incorrect. Because the science shows that weather does affect PSI. I don't think that is any legitimate argument about that.

But you then linked the youtube video. I assumed that you meant that link was the "science" you were referring to.

You are correct that there is not legitimate argument that weather does affect PSI. I am trying to figure out how much the weather (specifically at the AFCC) affected the PSI. The youtube video doesn't (IMO) prove that, and people who cite the "Ideal Gas Law" without showing how it proves anything (1 way or the other) don't either.

How do you define "science"? The HeadSmart video is certainly more scientific than plenty of other things thrown around in this thread. Please feel free to show me your "science" that disagrees with the HeadSmart video.

Btw, I've linked this several times, which shows the Ideal Gas calculations:

http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2ts1o6/are_bill_nye_and_neil_degrasse_tyson_wrong_on/

27.2 * ((50+459.67)/(72+459.67)) = 26.07. Subtract 14.7 from 26.07 and you get 11.37 PSI.

So the Ideal Gas Law says that dropping from 72 degrees to 50 degrees, means PSI drops from 12.5 to 11.4. Proof that you lose 1 PSI about every 20 degrees F.

A youtube video that doesn't show or specify how they came to their conclusions isn't "scientific" to me. As I've already posted, their findings may come from a truly, legitimate scientific test/experiment, but the way they are reported in that video isn't any kind of conclusive "scientific" proof, IMO. Pointing to it and saying (paraphrasing) "you can't argue with that" is flawed, in my book. If that isn't the science you were referring to, my apologies.

As far as the reddit link, how is that the Ideal Gas Law? (Not challenging, just asking), it doesn't look like the equation that I have seen. Can you explain what each number means/refers to?

 

[espnespn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxsXFX3tDpg

The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true.

Again, this isn't actually "science." These individuals don't show how they dropped the temperature (how fast/slow), and soaking footballs in water isn't the same as having them get rained on and dried off (and repeating the process, over and over). This is a youtube video that may/may not be based on a legitimate scientific test, but this video, in and of itself, isn't science. Saying it is doesn't make it so.

I think I read somewhere that it takes about 30 minutes for a room temperature football to cool down to 50 degrees or so (reach equilibrium). If the football was wet (and it was), it should reach equilibrium faster because water conducts heat faster than air. Like how 72 degree air feels comfortable, but 72 degree water feels cold.

The HeadSmart experiment isn't exactly like the game conditions, but it is fairly close. At this point, we are arguing over minor differences. For example, I could easily argue that every measurement of PSI by the refs drops the PSI: each time you stick in the gauge, the football lets out air and makes a brief whooshing noise. How many times did the refs check the PSI of Patriots balls? That could make the PSI lower than what the HeadSmart video shows.

Not arguing over minor differences, as I previously noted, that video may be based on a legitimate scientific experiment. The video itself, however, isn't "science," and as such the post/argument that "the science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't make it true" is flawed at it's very concept. I've seen numerous people trying to use science to prove their point on BOTH sides of this debate. Your statement that "arguing with my science doesn't make it true" could be made by people on the other side of the debate who have "science" that they believes supports their position. As far as I've seen, there isn't any "science" that seems to be totally conclusive.

One of the purposes of a scientific experiment is to be open about your methodology, so other people can test and refine the experiment.

I agree that the HeadSmart experiment does not perfectly reflect game conditions. But can you point to any experiment that improves on the flaws, and does not create other flaws? Just saying that an experiment is not perfect, does not mean you have disproved the underlying conclusion.

Bill Nye and Neil Tyson are scientists, but they did not run their own experiments disproving the HeadSmart video, so they have no basis to dispute it. Actually, they've made factually incorrect statements about temperature not affecting PSI and the 15% PSI difference.

I never said I disproved the underlying conclusion. I said that video isn't any kind of "science" that can't be argued with. In fact, I specifically said the video may be based on a perfectly legitimate experiment.

Generally, if someone wants to argue science, I hope they have competing evidence to argue with. Otherwise, what's their point?

Btw, when I said in Post #5227: "The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true." that was in response to someone who said: "I think the whole thing is silly but don't blame the weather."

Someone who says the weather didn't affect PSI is factually incorrect. Because the science shows that weather does affect PSI. I don't think that is any legitimate argument about that.

But you then linked the youtube video. I assumed that you meant that link was the "science" you were referring to.

You are correct that there is not legitimate argument that weather does affect PSI. I am trying to figure out how much the weather (specifically at the AFCC) affected the PSI. The youtube video doesn't (IMO) prove that, and people who cite the "Ideal Gas Law" without showing how it proves anything (1 way or the other) don't either.

How do you define "science"? The HeadSmart video is certainly more scientific than plenty of other things thrown around in this thread. Please feel free to show me your "science" that disagrees with the HeadSmart video.

Btw, I've linked this several times, which shows the Ideal Gas calculations:

http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2ts1o6/are_bill_nye_and_neil_degrasse_tyson_wrong_on/

27.2 * ((50+459.67)/(72+459.67)) = 26.07. Subtract 14.7 from 26.07 and you get 11.37 PSI.

So the Ideal Gas Law says that dropping from 72 degrees to 50 degrees, means PSI drops from 12.5 to 11.4. Proof that you lose 1 PSI about every 20 degrees F.

A youtube video that doesn't show or specify how they came to their conclusions isn't "scientific" to me. As I've already posted, their findings may come from a truly, legitimate scientific test/experiment, but the way they are reported in that video isn't any kind of conclusive "scientific" proof, IMO. Pointing to it and saying (paraphrasing) "you can't argue with that" is flawed, in my book. If that isn't the science you were referring to, my apologies.

As far as the reddit link, how is that the Ideal Gas Law? (Not challenging, just asking), it doesn't look like the equation that I have seen. Can you explain what each number means/refers to?

Just curious, how do you define "science" or "scientific"? Maybe we should agree on that first. If you don't think their video is "scientific", I'd like to see your general examples of something that actually is, just to understand what your threshold for "science" is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Is something on MythBusters scientific for example?

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

The balls were tampered with, both sets measured in fine at pregame and at halftime the colts footballs were still fine but the pats were not, no science or napkin math needed. Haters and apologists arguing over professionally made official nfl footballs possibly losing all their air pressure over a course of a game... and some of you sound like you actually believe that. Dont road trip in the winter or your car will be running on rims before you need to stop for gas. smh.

Oh, cool, you cracked the case. Please show us the link to where the NFL measured all the ball pregame and what their values were. Thanks in advance.

It's been reported several times that the balls fell within the acceptable range in pregame testing and then lost "at least 2 psi." This isn't a criminal investigation, the rules of evidence and the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard don't apply here. Reasonable people are free to believe the reports of objective journalists who are correct 99% of the time over players and coaches who are otherwise meticulous in their preparation but whose stories require us to assume otherwise, who have an obvious interest to protect; and who have been caught cheating in the recent past.

Tobias coming late to the party. Must not have seen the Florio report from Saturday, corroborated by others, that completely debunked the original Mort report you are citing that the balls were off by at least 2 psi. It's more like 1 psi - oh, except for the all that was in the Colts possession - that one mysteriously was the only one greater than 2 psi. Hmmm, investigation coming on that? Wonder if the NFL is looking at videos of the Colts ball boys on their sidelines...Might want to catch up... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/25/nfl-bears-plenty-of-blame-for-deflategate/

Thanks. I addressed every word in my other posts above ... including the distinction many including you seem to be missing between losing at least 2 psi and being "closer to 1 psi" under the minimum. Both could technically be true (1.4 is "closer to 1," and 11.1 could easily be a loss of "at least 2 psi" from whatever the baseline). And even if not, we're talking about very small discrepancies. Everyone seems to agree that the Pats balls lost significant pressure and came in well under the minimum at halftime. Also, nobody has disputed the account that the Colts' balls were fine pregame, at halftime and after the game, which seems to invalidate the possibility that the Pats balls lost pressure due to the weather, leaving us with no other reasonable explanation that I've heard for the discrepancy.

For me that's enough to cast quite a bit of suspicion on the Pats. I'm not certain they cheated, but it seems the most likely explanation, and that's really all I care about. I'm sure Pats fans disagree, but I'm not sure why, and I don't know how many non-Pats fans disagree.

I know your not really here for anything resembling reasonable debate, and most of this has already been addressed, but its a snow day so what the heck.

The pats have stated they inflated there balls to 12.5 so if there were balls found to be 11.1 that would be 1.4.

I don't think everyone agrees that NEs balls were significantly under unless you consider 1.0 psi all that significant and completely discount NEs explanation (prep, weather etc) for why their balls were 1-1.5 psi under. The beauty of it is they told the NFL how they prep the balls and how they feel weather effected them. Now if the NFL repeats the process and gets pretty much the same results, NE will get its apology (likely imho) and we are done here. If the NFL gets significantly different results then that's another story.

Many are disputing the assumption that the colts balls did not lose psi because the nfl nor any credible reporting source has reported what the colts psi was before the game. It has been "reported" (not by the nfl afaik) that the colts balls were within range, but we (you) do not know what the psi was to begin with which very well could have been 13.5 or more; no one really knows and we simply have to wait.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but do you have anything factual that disputes what I wrote above?

 

[shader]

You guys would be wise not responding to Tobias. He isn't interested in facts and is convinced that the Pats cheated.

It's a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality, not the opposite.

I suppose if you think they are guilty to begin with, lots of things look conspicuous.

 

[mbuehner]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxsXFX3tDpg

The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true.

Again, this isn't actually "science." These individuals don't show how they dropped the temperature (how fast/slow), and soaking footballs in water isn't the same as having them get rained on and dried off (and repeating the process, over and over). This is a youtube video that may/may not be based on a legitimate scientific test, but this video, in and of itself, isn't science. Saying it is doesn't make it so.

I think I read somewhere that it takes about 30 minutes for a room temperature football to cool down to 50 degrees or so (reach equilibrium). If the football was wet (and it was), it should reach equilibrium faster because water conducts heat faster than air. Like how 72 degree air feels comfortable, but 72 degree water feels cold.

The HeadSmart experiment isn't exactly like the game conditions, but it is fairly close. At this point, we are arguing over minor differences. For example, I could easily argue that every measurement of PSI by the refs drops the PSI: each time you stick in the gauge, the football lets out air and makes a brief whooshing noise. How many times did the refs check the PSI of Patriots balls? That could make the PSI lower than what the HeadSmart video shows.

Not arguing over minor differences, as I previously noted, that video may be based on a legitimate scientific experiment. The video itself, however, isn't "science," and as such the post/argument that "the science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't make it true" is flawed at it's very concept. I've seen numerous people trying to use science to prove their point on BOTH sides of this debate. Your statement that "arguing with my science doesn't make it true" could be made by people on the other side of the debate who have "science" that they believes supports their position. As far as I've seen, there isn't any "science" that seems to be totally conclusive.

One of the purposes of a scientific experiment is to be open about your methodology, so other people can test and refine the experiment.

I agree that the HeadSmart experiment does not perfectly reflect game conditions. But can you point to any experiment that improves on the flaws, and does not create other flaws? Just saying that an experiment is not perfect, does not mean you have disproved the underlying conclusion.

Bill Nye and Neil Tyson are scientists, but they did not run their own experiments disproving the HeadSmart video, so they have no basis to dispute it. Actually, they've made factually incorrect statements about temperature not affecting PSI and the 15% PSI difference.

I never said I disproved the underlying conclusion. I said that video isn't any kind of "science" that can't be argued with. In fact, I specifically said the video may be based on a perfectly legitimate experiment.

Generally, if someone wants to argue science, I hope they have competing evidence to argue with. Otherwise, what's their point?

Btw, when I said in Post #5227: "The science is what it is. Dismissing it doesn't mean it is not true." that was in response to someone who said: "I think the whole thing is silly but don't blame the weather."

Someone who says the weather didn't affect PSI is factually incorrect. Because the science shows that weather does affect PSI. I don't think that is any legitimate argument about that.

But you then linked the youtube video. I assumed that you meant that link was the "science" you were referring to.

You are correct that there is not legitimate argument that weather does affect PSI. I am trying to figure out how much the weather (specifically at the AFCC) affected the PSI. The youtube video doesn't (IMO) prove that, and people who cite the "Ideal Gas Law" without showing how it proves anything (1 way or the other) don't either.

How do you define "science"? The HeadSmart video is certainly more scientific than plenty of other things thrown around in this thread. Please feel free to show me your "science" that disagrees with the HeadSmart video.

Btw, I've linked this several times, which shows the Ideal Gas calculations:

http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2ts1o6/are_bill_nye_and_neil_degrasse_tyson_wrong_on/

27.2 * ((50+459.67)/(72+459.67)) = 26.07. Subtract 14.7 from 26.07 and you get 11.37 PSI.

So the Ideal Gas Law says that dropping from 72 degrees to 50 degrees, means PSI drops from 12.5 to 11.4. Proof that you lose 1 PSI about every 20 degrees F.

A youtube video that doesn't show or specify how they came to their conclusions isn't "scientific" to me. As I've already posted, their findings may come from a truly, legitimate scientific test/experiment, but the way they are reported in that video isn't any kind of conclusive "scientific" proof, IMO. Pointing to it and saying (paraphrasing) "you can't argue with that" is flawed, in my book. If that isn't the science you were referring to, my apologies.

As far as the reddit link, how is that the Ideal Gas Law? (Not challenging, just asking), it doesn't look like the equation that I have seen. Can you explain what each number means/refers to?

You cancel out some terms, because its air and the football volume is fixed (we're also assuming the barometric pressure is fixed but technically its not between indoors and outdoors- its higher out in the rainy air it would decrease the internal pressured even more, but thats hard to quantify).

Came to find out its actually Gay-Lussac's Law, which is the variation of the Ideal Gas Law, P1/T1=P2/T2. But to work, the temperature has to be in Kelvin, and the pressure has to be absolute pressure, not gauge pressure which is what you read off the gauge. Hence the further machinations. Its pretty easy though once you understand all that:

(Gauge Pressure + 14.7)/(Initial Degrees Fahrenheit + 459.67) = P2/ (Final Degrees Fahrenheit + 459.67).

cross multiply

(GP+14.7) x (Temp2+459.67) / (Temp1+459.67) = P2

Then subtract 14.7 from the result to get back to Gauge Pressure for comparison.

 

[Old Smiley]

This will all be pretty funny if it turns out the refs didn't meter the balls.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

You guys would be wise not responding to Tobias. He isn't interested in facts and is convinced that the Pats cheated.

It's a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality, not the opposite.

I suppose if you think they are guilty to begin with, lots of things look conspicuous.

I understand and will not waste much time.

 

[shader]

You guys would be wise not responding to Tobias. He isn't interested in facts and is convinced that the Pats cheated.

It's a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality, not the opposite.

I suppose if you think they are guilty to begin with, lots of things look conspicuous.

I understand and will not waste much time.

It's tough to have a rational discussion with someone in this matter, when their default stance is that the Pats cheated. Especially since we don't have a single drop of proof of that.

 

[Bucky86]

Something tells me that Gronk has a really bad diet. Would not surprise me that he filled up the balls with his farts

 

[12punch]

This will all be pretty funny if it turns out the refs didn't meter the balls.

it's already ####### hilarious if this thread wasn't such a sad condemnation of the american educational institution

 

[moleculo]

You cancel out some terms, because its air and the football volume is fixed (we're also assuming the barometric pressure is fixed but technically its not between indoors and outdoors- its higher out in the rainy air it would decrease the internal pressured even more, but thats hard to quantify).

Came to find out its actually Gay-Lussac's Law, which is the variation of the Ideal Gas Law, P1/T1=P2/T2. But to work, the temperature has to be in Kelvin, and the pressure has to be absolute pressure, not gauge pressure which is what you read off the gauge. Hence the further machinations. Its pretty easy though once you understand all that:

(Gauge Pressure + 14.7)/(Initial Degrees Fahrenheit + 459.67) = P2/ (Final Degrees Fahrenheit + 459.67).

cross multiply

(GP+14.7) x (Temp2+459.67) / (Temp1+459.67) = P2

Then subtract 14.7 from the result to get back to Gauge Pressure for comparison.

technically, you are using the Rankine scale, not Kelvin. It doesn't matter though because the ratio of T2/T1 would be the same independent of unit.

 

[mbuehner]

We ought to mention there is one variable that we havent accounted for, and I think would be tough to figure- the insulation of the leather ball.

All the ideal gas law tells us is that the ultimate pressure will be, but there's no time variable. Its still an open question how quickly the air inside the ball would drop to match the outside air temperature, which is why this is not going to give an exact answer (ie- it HAS to be 1.1PSI or somebody is cheating the laws of physics!).

Thats why the various experiments are a good thing. You can get real world data on what is happening to the pressure of a ball given a certain temperature chance, and how long it takes.

 

[Run It Up]

So I just got off work, what misinformation has been leaked today?

 

[12punch]

So I just got off work, what misinformation has been leaked today?

I don't think there were any leaks as of yet today

 

[Run It Up]

We ought to mention there is one variable that we havent accounted for, and I think would be tough to figure- the insulation of the leather ball.

All the ideal gas law tells us is that the ultimate pressure will be, but there's no time variable. Its still an open question how quickly the air inside the ball would drop to match the outside air temperature, which is why this is not going to give an exact answer (ie- it HAS to be 1.1PSI or somebody is cheating the laws of physics!).

Thats why the various experiments are a good thing. You can get real world data on what is happening to the pressure of a ball given a certain temperature chance, and how long it takes.

Before BB gave his presser, the initial comments from experts was that a ball should reach equilibrium in 30 to 60 minutes. A wet ball will cool faster. A worn ball will also cool faster.

 

[General Tso]

Breaking - Mike Kensel was on the Colts sideline and handled the ball that was intercepted.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The other NFL owners sure are quiet.

 

[mbuehner]

Breaking - Mike Kensel was on the Colts sideline and handled the ball that was intercepted.

What are the odds somebody on that Colts sideline somewhere in this process stuck a gauge in that football? Would explain why that ball was 2psi under and the others close to 1.

 

[Road Warriors]

You guys would be wise not responding to Tobias. He isn't interested in facts and is convinced that the Pats cheated.

It's a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality, not the opposite.

I suppose if you think they are guilty to begin with, lots of things look conspicuous.

Fixed it.

 

[ROCKET]

Something tells me that Gronk has a really bad diet. Would not surprise me that he filled up the balls with his farts

I only wish I had Gronk's diet

 

[General Tso]

Neil deGrasse Tyson just posted a retraction on the bs he posted earlier saying the balls would have had to be filled with 125 degree air to explain a 15% reduction in air pressure... Turns out he was only off by 35 degrees!

Bill Nye is now on the clock...

https://m.facebook.com/notes/neil-degrasse-tyson/deflategate/10153074004496613

 

[MG345]

Neil deGrasse Tyson just posted a retraction on the bs he posted earlier saying the balls would have had to be filled with 125 degree air to explain a 15% reduction in air pressure... Turns out he was only off by 35 degrees!

Bill Nye is now on the clock...

https://m.facebook.com/notes/neil-degrasse-tyson/deflategate/10153074004496613

So...you take that retraction as a positive thing?

 

[Grahamburn]

This has absolutely ruined the Super Bowl for me.

 

[Run It Up]

So, this is what I've gathered took place between the time I took a fap nap last night to today when I got home from work an hour ago.

Peter King all but retracted his previous statements and is now more or less supporting BB's version of the events.

Boston radio personalities Rich and Toucher have a source claiming the officials approved the underinflated balls or didn't measure them. (more or less a rehash of most of Pats fans original arguments)

Edit: I forgot, Mortenson said it wasn't his job to form opinions.

 

[General Tso]

Breaking - Mike Kensel was on the Colts sideline and handled the ball that was intercepted.

What are the odds somebody on that Colts sideline somewhere in this process stuck a gauge in that football? Would explain why that ball was 2psi under and the others close to 1.

You know what? I normally am not one to believe in conspiracy theories, but the way this story is going I can't rule it out completely. I think it's unlikely though.But it does pretty much sew up that this was indeed a sting operation. And it was led by an ex Jets front office person who was scorned by Belichik. And this guy handled the key piece of evidence - the intercepted football - a ball that has been reported to be 1 psi less than the other 11 balls. At worst it raises questions of tampering. At best it is a conflict of interest and poor handling of an investigation.

 

[shader]

Neil deGrasse Tyson just posted a retraction on the bs he posted earlier saying the balls would have had to be filled with 125 degree air to explain a 15% reduction in air pressure... Turns out he was only off by 35 degrees!

Bill Nye is now on the clock...

https://m.facebook.com/notes/neil-degrasse-tyson/deflategate/10153074004496613

So...you take that retraction as a positive thing?

Tyson is a talking head. Like Bill Nye.

 

[12punch]

This has absolutely ruined the Super Bowl for me.

btw, welcome to page 108, for anybody new to the thread

I wouldn't expect anybody to read through 107 pages of this stuff, so if you want to catch up just track down a movie called idiocracy and watch that

 

[ROCKET]

I see we have some truthers who are late to the party. They really missed the window for ultimate Pats bashing early on. The facts are:

The NFL came out early on with vague, leaked information that has yet to be confirmed.

The public/media frenzy ensued and the NFL leaks were made into some type of damning evidence of the Pats by some.

The Pats coach and qb both denied any wrong doing.

More leaks came from the NFL suggesting guilt. Again nothing confirmed.

Kraft comes out and calls bs on the league and says don't forget the apology when we are exonerated.

Many media members do a 180 from their initial condemnation, the NFL leaks have dried up and leaks continue to trickle out favoring the Pats story.

And here Pats haters continue to spout theories about the original evidence being fact and that the Pats are most likely guilty while most level headed people are waiting for the facts to be made public before forming any opinion of guilt/innocence.

Did I miss anything?