Patriots being investigated after Colts game (7 Viewers)

[Dr. Octopus]

This is a joyous day. Patriots record this year and for the past few is forever tainted with a

*

Patriots*

Such cheaters, so much homer butthurt in this thread after so much laughter in January.

Probable cheaters. The Wells Reports concludes it was probable, not for sure.

Love that. At this point the Pope would have to have cell phone footage of Tom Brady letting out the air himself..and then Pats fan would say it's not completely conclusive because the Pope is a known Jets homer.

The Wells Report itself says it was "probable". No one is making that up. That's plain english.

You probably wont admit Brady is guilty either. If you want your point to have any relevance at all; prove yourself right and admit that Brady is both the cheater and liar that he appears to be.

There's nothing to admit. The Wells Report says over and over that the cheating was probable, and specifically does not say there was cheating for sure.

A bunch of Salty Haters have problems understanding plain english, and seem to think "probable" means "for sure".

I hope for your sake this is blind loyalty or schtick.

 

[rockaction]

This is a joyous day. Patriots record this year and for the past few is forever tainted with a

*

Patriots*

Such cheaters, so much homer butthurt in this thread after so much laughter in January.

Probable cheaters. The Wells Reports concludes it was probable, not for sure.

Love that. At this point the Pope would have to have cell phone footage of Tom Brady letting out the air himself..and then Pats fan would say it's not completely conclusive because the Pope is a known Jets homer.

The Wells Report itself says it was "probable". No one is making that up. That's plain english.

You probably wont admit Brady is guilty either. If you want your point to have any relevance at all; prove yourself right and admit that Brady is both the cheater and liar that he appears to be.

There's nothing to admit. The Wells Report says over and over that the cheating was probable, and specifically does not say there was cheating for sure.

A bunch of Salty Haters have problems understanding plain english, and seem to think "probable" means "for sure".

I hope for your sake this is blind loyalty or schtick.

I think it's the fear that the rest of the public that follows football outside of New England views every Patriots championship with an *, and it just drives Patriots fans bat#### crazy. Sadly, it's also true. Do they beat the Ravens this year or have home field advantage throughout the playoffs if they're not deflating the game footballs? We won't know. The only thing we know is that they cheated.

 

[espnespn]

This is a joyous day. Patriots record this year and for the past few is forever tainted with a

*

Patriots*

Such cheaters, so much homer butthurt in this thread after so much laughter in January.

Probable cheaters. The Wells Reports concludes it was probable, not for sure.

Love that. At this point the Pope would have to have cell phone footage of Tom Brady letting out the air himself..and then Pats fan would say it's not completely conclusive because the Pope is a known Jets homer.

The Wells Report itself says it was "probable". No one is making that up. That's plain english.

You probably wont admit Brady is guilty either. If you want your point to have any relevance at all; prove yourself right and admit that Brady is both the cheater and liar that he appears to be.

There's nothing to admit. The Wells Report says over and over that the cheating was probable, and specifically does not say there was cheating for sure.

A bunch of Salty Haters have problems understanding plain english, and seem to think "probable" means "for sure".

I hope for your sake this is blind loyalty or schtick.

Well, I find that most people who pull out the "asterisk" argument are trying to troll, so I oblige by giving them their own medicine.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

From the LA Times on Exponent who did most of the scientific studies for the Wells Report:

But Exponent's research has come under fire from critics, including engineers, attorneys and academics who say the company tends to deliver to clients the reports they need to mount a public defense.

"If I were Toyota, I wouldn't have picked somebody like Exponent to do analysis," said Stanton Glantz, a cardiologist at UC San Francisco who runs a database on the tobacco industry that contains thousands of pages of Exponent research arguing, among other things, that secondhand smoke does not cause cancer. "I would have picked a firm with more of a reputation of neutrality."

In the late 1980s, it was hired by Suzuki to conduct tests that showed that the Samurai sport utility vehicle wouldn't tip over during turns at 38 mph, disputing research published by Consumer Reports magazine. In Exponent's research, the Samurai successfully completed turns at 43 mph. It called the Consumer Reports test "stunt like."

About 10 years ago, Ford, General Motors Corp. and Chrysler hired Exponent to help with their defense in a slew of lawsuits filed by mechanics who alleged that asbestos in brakes caused them health problems. Exponent's findings upheld the automakers' argument that the brakes were not a hazard.

The firm was hired by Exxon to show that a double hull probably would not have prevented the Valdez disaster of 1989. It was also hired by NASA to help determine causes of the Challenger shuttle explosion, and by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to survey the damages to the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building after the Oklahoma City bombing.

Swiss Re, an insurer of the World Trade Center, hired Exponent after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks to argue its case that it should have to pay only half the $7 billion in claims sought on the grounds that the collapse of one tower would have compromised the entire complex even if the second tower had not fallen.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18/business/la-fi-toyota-exponent18-2010feb18

 

[Run It Up]

From the LA Times on Exponent who did most of the scientific studies for the Wells Report:

But Exponent's research has come under fire from critics, including engineers, attorneys and academics who say the company tends to deliver to clients the reports they need to mount a public defense.

"If I were Toyota, I wouldn't have picked somebody like Exponent to do analysis," said Stanton Glantz, a cardiologist at UC San Francisco who runs a database on the tobacco industry that contains thousands of pages of Exponent research arguing, among other things, that secondhand smoke does not cause cancer. "I would have picked a firm with more of a reputation of neutrality."

In the late 1980s, it was hired by Suzuki to conduct tests that showed that the Samurai sport utility vehicle wouldn't tip over during turns at 38 mph, disputing research published by Consumer Reports magazine. In Exponent's research, the Samurai successfully completed turns at 43 mph. It called the Consumer Reports test "stunt like."

About 10 years ago, Ford, General Motors Corp. and Chrysler hired Exponent to help with their defense in a slew of lawsuits filed by mechanics who alleged that asbestos in brakes caused them health problems. Exponent's findings upheld the automakers' argument that the brakes were not a hazard.

The firm was hired by Exxon to show that a double hull probably would not have prevented the Valdez disaster of 1989. It was also hired by NASA to help determine causes of the Challenger shuttle explosion, and by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to survey the damages to the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building after the Oklahoma City bombing.

Swiss Re, an insurer of the World Trade Center, hired Exponent after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks to argue its case that it should have to pay only half the $7 billion in claims sought on the grounds that the collapse of one tower would have compromised the entire complex even if the second tower had not fallen.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18/business/la-fi-toyota-exponent18-2010feb18

I linked it earlier, also pointed out how almost all the experiments in the study done by Exponent for the Wells report were flawed in some way.

Kind of a big deal, but it doesn't matter, this ####s already in motion.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Attack the source!

/gameplan

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

a buddy of mine told me they listed measurements for pats and colts balls in there from halftime -- do we have those?

salty trolls

 

[davearm]

I forgot to mention this, but a massive hole that I've pointed out already, is that Ted Wells assumes the Patriots balls all started at 12.5 PSI. The refs didn't record it, but they claim to have measured the PSI. But there's video proof/other refs who have said in the past, that pre-game checking of PSI is not done very carefully.

If you don't know what the football PSI started at, how can you know how much it dropped? One popular theory from way back, is that the Patriots try to sneak in under-inflated balls past the refs to check (similar to how the Packers try to sneak over-inflated balls past the refs to check). If that is true, then the starting football PSI was lower, which combined with the cold weather explains the halftime PSI.

That video you keep referring to establishes that one ref, before one game, didn't check PSI very carefully.

It does not establish that that same ref doesn't check PSI very carefully before all games.

And it definitely does not establish that all refs don't check PSI very carefully before all games.

In this AFCC game, PSI was clearly a point of emphasis. There wasn't some cursory "eh, close enough" check done. My recollection of the report is that Walt Anderson checked all 12 balls, found a few over 12.5 (in the 12.7-12.8 range) most at 12.5, and two below 12.5. The two below 12.5 were inflated to 12.5.

The starting point for the balls was 12.5, or slightly higher in a few cases.

 

[Run It Up]

I forgot to mention this, but a massive hole that I've pointed out already, is that Ted Wells assumes the Patriots balls all started at 12.5 PSI. The refs didn't record it, but they claim to have measured the PSI. But there's video proof/other refs who have said in the past, that pre-game checking of PSI is not done very carefully.

If you don't know what the football PSI started at, how can you know how much it dropped? One popular theory from way back, is that the Patriots try to sneak in under-inflated balls past the refs to check (similar to how the Packers try to sneak over-inflated balls past the refs to check). If that is true, then the starting football PSI was lower, which combined with the cold weather explains the halftime PSI.

That video you keep referring to establishes that one ref, before one game, didn't check PSI very carefully.

It does not establish that that same ref doesn't check PSI very carefully before all games.

And it definitely does not establish that all refs don't check PSI very carefully before all games.

In this AFCC game, PSI was clearly a point of emphasis. There wasn't some cursory "eh, close enough" check done. My recollection of the report is that Walt Anderson checked all 12 balls, found a few over 12.5 (in the 12.7-12.8 range) most at 12.5, and two below 12.5. The two below 12.5 were inflated to 12.5.

The starting point for the balls was 12.5, or slightly higher in a few cases.

Allegedly, according to the guy who was supposed to be responsible for them. Who then later, lost the balls.

 

[rockaction]

Pats fans that benefitted from destroyed videotapes in the hands of the league office now butthurt when process doesn't perfectly conform to their standards.

Talking points issued from the New England corridor.

So funny. Patriots*

 

[rockaction]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

 

[Old Smiley]

So, the league hires this Exodus. Was this an investigation? Or a prosecution.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

So, the league hires this Exodus. Was this an investigation? Or a prosecution.

Investigation. Unless you are a * fan. Then its whatever you need it to be to try and counter the overall truth of the situation.

 

[Bayhawks]

The sad thing is I don't think espnespn is fishing but he may as well be. I'm surprised so many continue to indulge his nonsense.

It's just so unbelievably entertaining that any one person can be so blissfully ignorant. In situations such as these I can't simply turn away and ignore the ignorance. It's like a coke addict ignoring an 8 ball on the table in front of him. My brain just can't understand how people can have evidence literally thrust down their throat and just brush it off with such horribly flawed explanations.

Simple fact is, just throwing away the entire document due to the usage of the word 'probable' and ignoring the "more probably than not" is just ridiculous. Perfect example, the THEORY of Gravity could be stated as:

"Our study concluded that the theory of gravity is more probable than not" that doesn't mean gravity doesn't suddenly exist.

Just like saying that the study concluded it's more probable than not that Tom Brady is a cheating piece of ####. Both the same thing.

"More probable than not" is equivalent to "preponderance of evidence", which only means greater than 50%. It is a lower standard of proof than "clear and convincing evidence" and "beyond reasonable doubt". If Ted Wells was so convinced, he would have concluded that it met the other higher standards instead, right?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/06/more-probable-than-not-carries-important-legal-meaning/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof#Preponderance_of_the_evidence

"Clear and convincing proof means that the evidence presented by a party during the trial must be highly and substantially more probable to be true than not and the trier of fact must have a firm belief or conviction in its factuality. In this standard, a greater degree of believability must be met than the common standard of proof in civil actions, which only requires that the facts as a threshold be more likely than not to prove the issue for which they are asserted."

Did you even read your links?

Based on your posts in this thread, I'm inclined to believe that you are a Pats fan or are of the opinion that the Pats are being unfairly targeted here. Yet your links provide evidence that the Pats are, in NFL terms, guilty.

1-This wasn't/isn't a criminal case, so "clear and convincing proof" isn't necessary. If it were a criminal case, Tom Brady wouldn't have had the option of saying "No, I won't let you see my phone records (which would present clear and convincing proof of his involvement/lack of involvement with the 2 other Pats employees);" in a criminal case, those records could be subpoened.

2-Your first link has Goodell saying that even that standard a "preponderance of evidence" is too stringent, and that the NFL needs LESS proof than that to establish a violation, and therefore administer punishment.

So, you are arguing semantics over the term probable, while the fact is that Goodell has said the NFL shouldn't even require the level of "proof" that the Wells reports (IN YOUR OWN WORDS) has determined was present.

 

[Bayhawks]

The sad thing is I don't think espnespn is fishing but he may as well be. I'm surprised so many continue to indulge his nonsense.

I'll admit that I'm partially fishing, if the Salty Haters admit they are also partially fishing.

Seriously though, a lot of people here are over-stating the level of guilt found in the report. Yes, there are lots of texts that look bad. But there are legitimate holes in the report. Ted Wells knew there were holes, which is why he didn't conclude guilt for sure. And if he didn't conclude guilt for sure, how could anyone else?

I think you mistake the term "holes" for the term "lack of definitive evidence of guilt". The two are not interchangible. In fact, there are very few, if any holes in Wells documentation and I would implore you to point them out. The only hole is the lack of a smoking gun. If they had a text from Brady or too Brady stating clearly that he was involved it'd be done. But dammit if they don't have a pile of stuff that all points to the all but certain fact that Brady cheated.

There are at least 3 levels of proof that could have applied here:

a) Lowest level above 50% guilt: "Preponderance of evidence"/"More probable than not"

b) Next level above 50% guilt: "Clear and convincing evidence"

c) Highest level above 50% guilt: "Beyond reasonable doubt"

Don't you think there's a reason why he concluded the lowest level above 50% guilt? If he was so sure, he could have said so. But he didn't.

You do realize that the language used in the report mimics the language used in the NFL rules regarding the commissioner being able to hand down punishment, right? There's a reason that language was used.

Since the Patriots blocked a full and total investigation, some things had to be based on the probability of statistical models. They determined that there was a 4/1000ths chance that the balls were not deflated purposefully. So they were very exacting and used the exact wording in the NFL rules and said that it was probable that a violation had occurred.

Yes, that's true that the language mimics the NFL rules. But as pointed out in the link, there is still a higher level of guilt that the NFL can use when a team doesn't cooperate: "credible corroborating evidence"

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/06/more-probable-than-not-carries-important-legal-meaning/

So if Ted Wells could choose between "more probable than not" (lower level of guilt) vs "credible corroborating evidence" (higher level of guilt), why did he choose the lower level?

Not in the context of the article. "More probable than not" is a higher standard than "credible corroborating evidence."

Hmmm, I guess you have a point: it says "more probable than not" is perhaps even higher than "credible corroborating evidence". My bad.

>

"That’s a standard perhaps even higher than the one that applies to players accused of violating the Personal Conduct Policy, where “credible corroborating evidence” (even without cooperation from the alleged victim) can result in a significant suspension. Regardless, it’s enough proof on which the NFL can base punishment of a team."

>

"The primary standards in the legal system are the high bar of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal prosecutions, the lower test of clear and convincing evidence incertain civil cases, and the minimal, 51-49 barrier known as preponderance of the evidence, which applies in most lawsuits.

In the statement announcing Hardy’s 10-game suspension, the NFL simply said that the “decision is based on findings that are supported by credible corroborating evidence independent of Ms. Holder’s statements and testimony, such as testimony of other witnesses, medical and police reports, expert analyses, and photographs.” But under what standard is the evidence deemed to be credible, especially with Nicole Holder not cooperating due to the settlement she received?"

In any event, I believe that "clear and convincing evidence" (which is higher guilt than 'more probable than not') is a standard recognized in the NFL: that phrase pops up in the CBA.

https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf

That term is used with regards to the NFLPA being able to terminate the CBA if "clear and convincing evidence" exists that a number of NFL teams violated it, or a contract that was terminated can be re-instated if "clear and convincing evidence" exists that it was wrongfully terminated. Neither of those is relevant to the matter at hand.

You're clinging at straws, here: "Oh, yeah, I was wrong, the Wells report does offer a higher standard of proof than is necessary, I still think the higher standard should apply, because that phrase can be found in the CBA, in two completely unrelated areas."

 

[T J]

From the LA Times on Exponent who did most of the scientific studies for the Wells Report:

But Exponent's research has come under fire from critics, including engineers, attorneys and academics who say the company tends to deliver to clients the reports they need to mount a public defense.

"If I were Toyota, I wouldn't have picked somebody like Exponent to do analysis," said Stanton Glantz, a cardiologist at UC San Francisco who runs a database on the tobacco industry that contains thousands of pages of Exponent research arguing, among other things, that secondhand smoke does not cause cancer. "I would have picked a firm with more of a reputation of neutrality."

In the late 1980s, it was hired by Suzuki to conduct tests that showed that the Samurai sport utility vehicle wouldn't tip over during turns at 38 mph, disputing research published by Consumer Reports magazine. In Exponent's research, the Samurai successfully completed turns at 43 mph. It called the Consumer Reports test "stunt like."

About 10 years ago, Ford, General Motors Corp. and Chrysler hired Exponent to help with their defense in a slew of lawsuits filed by mechanics who alleged that asbestos in brakes caused them health problems. Exponent's findings upheld the automakers' argument that the brakes were not a hazard.

The firm was hired by Exxon to show that a double hull probably would not have prevented the Valdez disaster of 1989. It was also hired by NASA to help determine causes of the Challenger shuttle explosion, and by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to survey the damages to the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building after the Oklahoma City bombing.

Swiss Re, an insurer of the World Trade Center, hired Exponent after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks to argue its case that it should have to pay only half the $7 billion in claims sought on the grounds that the collapse of one tower would have compromised the entire complex even if the second tower had not fallen.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18/business/la-fi-toyota-exponent18-2010feb18

I linked it earlier, also pointed out how almost all the experiments in the study done by Exponent for the Wells report were flawed in some way.

Kind of a big deal, but it doesn't matter, this ####s already in motion.

Were all the texts flawed in some way also?

 

[Tango]

Listening to 98.5

It's nice to hear that most Boston fans including the hosts think Brady is guilty; with the lying being the worst, most long-lasting, and damaging to his legacy in this case.

 

[T J]

This is a joyous day. Patriots record this year and for the past few is forever tainted with a

*

Patriots*

Such cheaters, so much homer butthurt in this thread after so much laughter in January.

Probable cheaters. The Wells Reports concludes it was probable, not for sure.

Love that. At this point the Pope would have to have cell phone footage of Tom Brady letting out the air himself..and then Pats fan would say it's not completely conclusive because the Pope is a known Jets homer.

The Wells Report itself says it was "probable". No one is making that up. That's plain english.

You probably wont admit Brady is guilty either. If you want your point to have any relevance at all; prove yourself right and admit that Brady is both the cheater and liar that he appears to be.

There's nothing to admit. The Wells Report says over and over that the cheating was probable, and specifically does not say there was cheating for sure.

A bunch of Salty Haters have problems understanding plain english, and seem to think "probable" means "for sure".

hang your hat on that if it makes you feel good.

I'm hanging my hat on plain dictionary meanings. If you believe the dictionary is wrong, what can I say?

Do you know what the word "dense" means. Your posts are describing it for reference.

 

[rjv]

This comes to no shock to anyone. These guys are habitual cheaters. There is a pattern here and Goodell needs to make a example of them. Suspension is at the least of the punishment. Why not even suspend Belacheat for a season like he did Payton? So before you go off and say Belacheat had nothing to do with it, he knows EVERYTHING what happens in that organization

 

[The General]

This comes to no shock to anyone. These guys are habitual cheaters. There is a pattern here and Goodell needs to make a example of them. Suspension is at the least of the punishment. Why not even suspend Belacheat for a season like he did Payton?

Because him and Kraft are buttbuddies. Maybe get a stern talking to.Seriously though can't see how Brady dodges a suspension.

 

[rjv]

Brady is not the golden boy everyone believes.

 

[GroveDiesel]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low. I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

 

[rockaction]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low.I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

Yeah, I was really surprised by their conclusion even though back when Deflategate came to light, Brian Burke was citing those statistics and did his own take on it. I'm certainly not qualified to understand their statistical analysis, so I have to defer to authority. If what they say is true, there should be serious consequences, but I've always been a salty hater.

 

[randall146]

McNally: Tom sucks...im going make that next ball a fin balloon

Jastremski: Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done...

Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though...

Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn... The refs fed us...a few of then were at almost 16

Jastremski: They didnt recheck then after they put air in them

McNally: F tom ...16 is nothing...wait till next sunday

Jastremski: Omg! Spaz

I am wondering how these texts where obtained by the commission. Knowing that some lawyer can obtain my private conversations when no crime was committed makes me want to throw away my phone.

The Pats handed over the work phones they had issued to these guys

 

[johnnycakes]

Brady is not the golden boy everyone believes.

As I have said, he's a team player. And I don't think the buck stops with TB12.

Kool-Aid drinking homers aside, Patriots fans are as much a victim of this as anyone else.

 

[HellToupee]

I'm sure hope Tom didn't lie to Krafty Bob

 

[randall146]

There's way too much talk in here about standards of proof and what individual words mean.

Read the report and it's as clear as can be that the 2 Pats equipment guys were knowingly deflating the balls after the refs checked them. It's also clear that they were doing this because Brady wanted the balls the way he wanted them and came down hard on them if the balls weren't right.

I suppose there's some wiggle room in there about whether Brady actually knew they were doing something illegal to get the balls that way, but if he didn't know he was intentionally blind to it.

 

[espnespn]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low.I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

Yeah, I was really surprised by their conclusion even though back when Deflategate came to light, Brian Burke was citing those statistics and did his own take on it. I'm certainly not qualified to understand their statistical analysis, so I have to defer to authority. If what they say is true, there should be serious consequences, but I've always been a salty hater.

538 also analyzed Spygate, and found:

"Relative to Vegas’s expectations, the Patriots scored 2.4 more points per game than they “should” have during the pre-Spygate era. That might lend credence to the idea that taping defensive signals gave them an advantage, if it weren’t for the fact that they also outscored Vegas’s expectations by exactly 2.4 in the post-Spygate era as well. That means New England’s offensive overachievement was more likely due to great coaching and quarterback play, which persisted across both eras, than to any illicit edge."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-patriots-opponents-wont-let-spygate-die-but-did-it-really-matter/

Does that mean Salty Haters have to accept 3 SBs as legit, if Pats fans agree that this last SB has an asterisk?

 

[T J]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low.I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

Yeah, I was really surprised by their conclusion even though back when Deflategate came to light, Brian Burke was citing those statistics and did his own take on it. I'm certainly not qualified to understand their statistical analysis, so I have to defer to authority. If what they say is true, there should be serious consequences, but I've always been a salty hater.

538 also analyzed Spygate, and found:

"Relative to Vegas’s expectations, the Patriots scored 2.4 more points per game than they “should” have during the pre-Spygate era. That might lend credence to the idea that taping defensive signals gave them an advantage, if it weren’t for the fact that they also outscored Vegas’s expectations by exactly 2.4 in the post-Spygate era as well. That means New England’s offensive overachievement was more likely due to great coaching and quarterback play, which persisted across both eras, than to any illicit edge."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-patriots-opponents-wont-let-spygate-die-but-did-it-really-matter/

Does that mean Salty Haters have to accept 3 SBs as legit, if Pats fans agree that this last SB has an asterisk?

Fyi... The Salty Haters term no longer applies. It's not a hate thing anymore. It's a discussion of a team caught cheating red handed ...again.

 

[rockaction]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low.I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

Yeah, I was really surprised by their conclusion even though back when Deflategate came to light, Brian Burke was citing those statistics and did his own take on it. I'm certainly not qualified to understand their statistical analysis, so I have to defer to authority. If what they say is true, there should be serious consequences, but I've always been a salty hater.

538 also analyzed Spygate, and found:

"Relative to Vegas’s expectations, the Patriots scored 2.4 more points per game than they “should” have during the pre-Spygate era. That might lend credence to the idea that taping defensive signals gave them an advantage, if it weren’t for the fact that they also outscored Vegas’s expectations by exactly 2.4 in the post-Spygate era as well. That means New England’s offensive overachievement was more likely due to great coaching and quarterback play, which persisted across both eras, than to any illicit edge."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-patriots-opponents-wont-let-spygate-die-but-did-it-really-matter/

Does that mean Salty Haters have to accept 3 SBs as legit, if Pats fans agree that this last SB has an asterisk?

Nah, they're using Vegas expectations and saying "more likely." Not sure those are great premises.

 

[massraider]

PSI blah blah blah.

Atmospheric Conditions blah blah blah.

TEXT MESSAGES.

The End.

 

[JIslander]

Well really, the Pats just went seemless from one "gate" to another...

 

[Ned]

As a long time Pats fan, I'm pretty disappointed in the fact that Brady was intentionally cheating, paying off equipment guys to do it, and then tried to cover this up. It's funny how having kids can change things. If I had no kids, I probably wouldn't care as much about all this, but my 2 sons (8 & 6) idolize Brady. Maybe I'm being overly dramatic or over reacting, but I'm pissed off that I need to try to explain to them that someone we've heavily cheered/rooted for is a liar. He came off as a really good dude and someone that I was proud the kids rooted for. Now, I'm not so sure.

Enjoy the #### show, non-Pats fans. I know a lot of you have been waiting for this for a long time.

 

[Tango]

PSI blah blah blah.

Atmospheric Conditions blah blah blah.

TEXT MESSAGES.

The End.

the disappearing balls during pregame of the AFC Championship is quite a revelation. Has anyone read that? Wow...

 

[massraider]

PSI blah blah blah.

Atmospheric Conditions blah blah blah.

TEXT MESSAGES.

The End.

the disappearing balls during pregame of the AFC Championship is quite a revelation. Has anyone read that? Wow...

Oh, yeah, we already have a Pats fan here that blames the ref for 'losing ' them.

 

[Tango]

PSI blah blah blah.

Atmospheric Conditions blah blah blah.

TEXT MESSAGES.

The End.

the disappearing balls during pregame of the AFC Championship is quite a revelation. Has anyone read that? Wow...

and I should add that the freak-out that occurred with game officials when the ball disappeared was also quite a revelation. There were guys running around the stadium frantically looking for the Patriots balls. They started getting backup balls ready and then....poof....the balls re-appeared.

 

[massraider]

Enjoy the #### show, non-Pats fans. I know a lot of you have been waiting for this for a long time.

Since the last time they were caught cheating, you mean? Hasn't been that long.

 

[James Daulton]

I thought ol' Bob said, in a very stern manner, that the ball's deflation was due to weather conditions? Didn't he have some science lingo to back it up?

So basically, the Ravens would have beaten the Pats with normal balls, they'd have demolished the Colts, and beaten the Hawks. I think the Supe should be awarded to Baltimore.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Peter King this morning:

There is enough circumstantial evidence in the long-awaited 243-pageTed Wells report released Wednesday that footballs used by the Patriots were improperly deflated before the AFC Championship Game. It’s impossible to read the exhaustive document without suspecting that four-time Super Bowl champion Tom Brady, one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, had some idea—or more than just some—that Patriot minions were doctoring the footballs to Brady’s liking.

Text messages along the lines of "Hey, I have get these balls deflated or Tom's going to give me #### about it" are not circumstantial evidence. Whatever the opposite of circumstantial evidence is, those texts are that.

 

[GroveDiesel]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low.I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

Yeah, I was really surprised by their conclusion even though back when Deflategate came to light, Brian Burke was citing those statistics and did his own take on it. I'm certainly not qualified to understand their statistical analysis, so I have to defer to authority. If what they say is true, there should be serious consequences, but I've always been a salty hater.

538 also analyzed Spygate, and found:

"Relative to Vegas’s expectations, the Patriots scored 2.4 more points per game than they “should” have during the pre-Spygate era. That might lend credence to the idea that taping defensive signals gave them an advantage, if it weren’t for the fact that they also outscored Vegas’s expectations by exactly 2.4 in the post-Spygate era as well. That means New England’s offensive overachievement was more likely due to great coaching and quarterback play, which persisted across both eras, than to any illicit edge."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-patriots-opponents-wont-let-spygate-die-but-did-it-really-matter/

Does that mean Salty Haters have to accept 3 SBs as legit, if Pats fans agree that this last SB has an asterisk?

Except that, oops, it turns out that they were cheating in OTHER ways after the fact, which means that their analysis in that article is now based on a faulty premise.

And at this point, I think the possibility that they've been cheating in other ways that just haven't come to light yet can't be discounted. Throw enough money at some of these equipment guys or other poor dumb schmoes and I bet this whole thing ends up collapsing in on itself and suddenly the Patriots are the Black Sox of the NFL.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Peter King this morning:

There is enough circumstantial evidence in the long-awaited 243-pageTed Wells report released Wednesday that footballs used by the Patriots were improperly deflated before the AFC Championship Game. Its impossible to read the exhaustive document without suspecting that four-time Super Bowl champion Tom Brady, one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, had some ideaor more than just somethat Patriot minions were doctoring the footballs to Bradys liking.

Text messages along the lines of "Hey, I have get these balls deflated or Tom's going to give me #### about it" are not circumstantial evidence. Whatever the opposite of circumstantial evidence is, those texts are that.

Yeah, well, King is a huge Boston guy, so writing even that had to kill him.Let's see if anyone at Grantland has the balls to stand up to their Editor in Chief who was in full homer meltdown last night. My bet is that Grantland runs an article trying to minimize the whole thing. No way Simmons allows anyone there to put into question any of the Patriots' or Brady's achievements.

 

[rockaction]

This is a bit off-topic, but what planet is this guy from WEEI on? This is an actual article. "The Disgusting Character Assassination of Tom Brady"

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/football/patriots/mike-petraglia/2015/05/06/character-assassination-tom-brady

eta* Another Boston homer moment. Tom Curran of CSN declared that no punishment nor suspension should be handed down because the report was "damaging enough."

Wat?

Boston is completely unhinged today.

 

[matuski]

We should string up Brady like we did Jerry Rice.

Burn them at the stake.

 

[FUBAR]

Peter King this morning:

There is enough circumstantial evidence in the long-awaited 243-pageTed Wells report released Wednesday that footballs used by the Patriots were improperly deflated before the AFC Championship Game. It’s impossible to read the exhaustive document without suspecting that four-time Super Bowl champion Tom Brady, one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, had some idea—or more than just some—that Patriot minions were doctoring the footballs to Brady’s liking.

Text messages along the lines of "Hey, I have get these balls deflated or Tom's going to give me #### about it" are not circumstantial evidence. Whatever the opposite of circumstantial evidence is, those texts are that.

no, the texts would be a textbook example of circumstantial evidence.

 

[Tango]

Love the Pats homers in here defending the potential cheating.

I love the pats haters in here accusing them of something that isn't proven.

Funny, I'm listening to all the Pats haters that live in Boston and are Pats fans admitting Brady is not only a cheater, but a liar. Are Pats fans Brady haters too?

 

[12punch]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low.I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

Yeah, I was really surprised by their conclusion even though back when Deflategate came to light, Brian Burke was citing those statistics and did his own take on it. I'm certainly not qualified to understand their statistical analysis, so I have to defer to authority. If what they say is true, there should be serious consequences, but I've always been a salty hater.

538 also analyzed Spygate, and found:

"Relative to Vegass expectations, the Patriots scored 2.4 more points per game than they should have during the pre-Spygate era. That might lend credence to the idea that taping defensive signals gave them an advantage, if it werent for the fact that they also outscored Vegass expectations by exactly 2.4 in the post-Spygate era as well. That means New Englands offensive overachievement was more likely due to great coaching and quarterback play, which persisted across both eras, than to any illicit edge."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-patriots-opponents-wont-let-spygate-die-but-did-it-really-matter/

Does that mean Salty Haters have to accept 3 SBs as legit, if Pats fans agree that this last SB has an asterisk?

Fyi... The Salty Haters term no longer applies. It's not a hate thing anymore.

Loooooool OK

And lesean McCoy isn't butthurt about getting dumped, either

Who are you trying to convince -- pats fans or yourself?

 

[T J]

538 examines report, concludes that Pats likely gained material advantage by cheating.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/fivethirtyeight-dissects-the-deflategate-report/

Whoa, this takes things to a different level. I hope the 538 guys follow through on their statistical analysis on fumble rates. Sounds like they've already demonstrated that the Patriots have benefited from an absurdly low fumble rate and that the odds of that being from chance are pretty low.I'd love to see a follow up where they control for variables like the types of plays run, etc and also try to look for a period of years where any other team may have had similar patterns. And lastly, I'd love for them to quantify just how many wins that advantage likely gave them over that time period.

I mean, this really does seem to call into question the legitimacy of their entire run. Turnover differential is one of the biggest statistical factors in wins and losses. This could easily have added a game or two advantage every season.

Yeah, I was really surprised by their conclusion even though back when Deflategate came to light, Brian Burke was citing those statistics and did his own take on it. I'm certainly not qualified to understand their statistical analysis, so I have to defer to authority. If what they say is true, there should be serious consequences, but I've always been a salty hater.

538 also analyzed Spygate, and found:

"Relative to Vegass expectations, the Patriots scored 2.4 more points per game than they should have during the pre-Spygate era. That might lend credence to the idea that taping defensive signals gave them an advantage, if it werent for the fact that they also outscored Vegass expectations by exactly 2.4 in the post-Spygate era as well. That means New Englands offensive overachievement was more likely due to great coaching and quarterback play, which persisted across both eras, than to any illicit edge."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-patriots-opponents-wont-let-spygate-die-but-did-it-really-matter/

Does that mean Salty Haters have to accept 3 SBs as legit, if Pats fans agree that this last SB has an asterisk?

Fyi... The Salty Haters term no longer applies. It's not a hate thing anymore.

Loooooool OK

And lesean McCoy isn't butthurt about getting dumped, either

Who are you trying to convince -- pats fans or yourself?

Awww...... did I hurt your wittle feelings?

 

[Native]

the more I read the worse it is for Brady. Guy is completely busted.

Going to be hard for even Pats homers to believe otherwise.

So now it shifts to everyone cheats, it's a stupid rule, it doesn't matter anyway or some other variation of this.

Anyone have a link to his Deflategate press conference?

NM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD7i5hQYHZs

"The equipment guys do a great job of breaking the balls in"

Will watch this later. Thanks for posting.

Just rewatched Brady's interview from January. He was extremely cool when answering some difficult questions, yet struggled answering a few softballs. A few non-scientific insights based purely on paying attention to his body language and tone during the press conference:

1. Incredibly, Brady's demeanor seemed confident and even credible when he stated that he didnt notice that the balls were deflated prior to the AFC Championship. If he was lying, he sold it very well. One theory as to why he came off as believable is that this has been happening for a long time, and therefore Brady simply stopped noticing the amount of air in the balls (as incredulous as that sounds). If playing with deflated balls became a matter of habit, I can see Brady stops dwelling on the crime or paying attention to size the of the football.

2. On the other hand, his demeanor when asked about who might have deflated the balls screams panic and avoidance. He steers clear of blaming the equipment guys on multiple occasions and refuses to speculate on punishment in the event perpetrators are found guilty. His responses feel like a cover-up, and based on the report we now understand why.

If I had to guess what *really* happened, Id say that Brady ordered the equipment guys at some point to deflate the balls, but that it was not a recurring conversation. The equipment guys then had to perpetrate the act every week on gameday. This would explain why Brady seems so nonchalant about his own involvement in the Colts fiasco (because his order didnt need to be given before every game), yet was very careful not to lay blame on the staff given his knowledge that theyre following his directive every week.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Yeah... when you catch someone cheating twice you can pretty much be sure they're doing all sorts of other things you didn't know about.

I'm sure there are a ton of normal people in Boston who are bummed about this, but basically accept it.

But even the Johnnie Cochran wannabees in this thread know, deep down, that the rest of the world now looks at their team the same way that we do Barry Bonds.

 

[FUBAR]

Yeah... when you catch someone cheating twice you can pretty much be sure they're doing all sorts of other things you didn't know about.

I'm sure there are a ton of normal people in Boston who are bummed about this, but basically accept it.

But even the Johnnie Cochran wannabees in this thread know, deep down, that the rest of the world now looks at their team the same way that we do Barry Bonds.

That's an interesting point.

They do have a few things in common (and I write this as not a fan of the Patriots, though I do like Brady)

1. Both cheated and got caught.

2. Many others in their sports were also cheating in various ways.

3. Even without cheating they are among the best in their professions.

4. their cheating led to them elevating themselves above others, who as in point 2, were also cheating.

My gut has me viewing Bonds as worse (possibly simply because I like Tom) but on a logical level I'm not entirely sure that's true.