Are you ready for some NFL Football? 2014 Edition.

[dsc123]

For the record, I still consider myself a very unbiased outside observer.  I am not a Patriots fan - not remotely close - however, I'm not a Patriots hater either.  Just a football fan with a perennially under-acheiving team (Chargers).

What Scott and I agree on is the fact that there is no "evidence" that the balls were tampered with unless and until there is anything definitive about the testing procedure.  And I can't help but notice how easily people are willing to dissect every word and facial tick from Tom Brady and convince themselves that he is lying or being evasive, while at the same time just taking on faith that the balls were strictly tested before the game.  You WANT to crucify the Patriots and therefore, all you need is a referee going "Yeah, I tested them before the game."  You don't want to ask anymore questions beyond that, because that's enough right there.

Now, let me paint a different scenario.  Imagine if last weeks game ended close, and imagine if, in his postgame press conference Andrew Luck mentioned that there was something off with the feel of the balls for the entire first half.  He couldn't get a grip, they felt over-inflated, and he felt that that contributed to his overthrows and fumbles.  He brought it to the attention of his equipment guy and they brought it to the attention of the NFL, and they come to find out that they were all over-inflated by 1 PSI.  Now everybody goes to the referee and says, what gives?  The referee says "Yeah, I tested them before the game."

Do you honestly think that the world would accept that answer?  Hell no.  Now I ask you, why the discrepancy?  Nobody wants to admit it, but the answer is plain as day.  It's because it's the Patriots.  Period.  Scott's other links regarding cheating - one even specifically involving definitive proof that balls were being tampered with on the sidelines!!!!, and one involving something quite similar to videotaping opponents from the sideline - that nobody gives a rats ass about prove that.

I thought you were much closer to convicting.

Your luck scenario is COMPLETELY different.  Would I believe the ref?  I would have no idea what to think.  I wouldn't think that there would be any reason for the ref to inflate the ball.  I wouldn't accuse him of mismeasuring because that means the Colts' equipment guy pumped it up more than Luck likes, and lucked picked out a ball that he didnt like.  And I wouldn't think that the ball boy would add air after it was tested if Luck didn't tell him too.  So it doesn't make any sense.

In reality, Brady got a flat ball that advantaged him.  Motive.  There's a reason to doubt his denial.  There's no reason to doubt the refs.

And on top of that, all of these possibilities as to how the refs could have screwed up, none of them explain it.  The gauge used on the Pats balls was off?  What about the 12th ball?  The temp change?  What about the Colts' balls?   Its like raising a bunch of questions that don't get you anywhere.

---

How do you reconcile this theory with the other 236 NFL games that Tom Brady has played in?  (235 of which displayed no inkling of an issue with the ball pressure.)

233.  The Colts reported the issue to the league during the regular season and the Ravens raised the issue in regards to last week's game.

---

And I think everyone will stipulate that the Pats would have won regardless.  Some of us just think stealing someone else' wallet is just as wrong when there's $10 in it as when there's $100.  And that the obvious culture of cheating being acceptable in NE.

---

Oh, and Scott went with my #2, which was basically, "the Pats deflated the ball, but its not a big deal."  You're more deferential to the Pats than he is.

[boogielicious]

"Send Lawyers, Guns and Money!  Dad get me out of this." - Warren Zevon

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000462476/article/nfl-investigation-of-balls-in-afc-title-game-led-by-pash-wells

Don't expect resolution any time soon.

[dsc123]

Alright @Golfingdad , now where do you stand after this:

Quote:

Prior to the game, the game officials inspect the footballs to be used by each team and confirm that this standard is satisfied, which was done before last Sunday's game.

And

Quote:

While the evidence thus far supports the conclusion that footballs that were under-inflated were used by the Patriots in the first half, the footballs were properly inflated for the second half and confirmed at the conclusion of the game to have remained properly inflated

Unless the balls were brought to a different location (and temp) than the original test to be inflated, the weather can be ruled out since the balls did not deflate again.

[GolfLug]

If needles were taken to properly inflated balls in the first half to 'benefit' Brady, why would that practice be abandoned in the second half after they were re-inflated at half time? Nobody has asked them to stop or blown a whistle right?

Did the 'cheaters'  find religion at onset of 2nd half instead of getting back to their 'cheating ways'? .

[Golfingdad]

Alright @Golfingdad, now where do you stand after this:

And

Unless the balls were brought to a different location (and temp) than the original test to be inflated, the weather can be ruled out since the balls did not deflate again.

OK, then I guess now I'll just put myself with Scott in the "2" category.  Why, you ask?  Because we didn't make a stink about this in regards to the Vikings/Panthers, and I bet none of us even knew about it.  We scoff at it because, who cares, it's not the Patriots.

If needles were taken to properly inflated balls in the first half to 'benefit' Brady, why would that practice be abandoned in the second half after they were re-inflated at half time? Nobody has asked them to stop or blown a whistle right?

Did the 'cheaters'  find religion at onset of 2nd half instead of getting back to their 'cheating ways'? .

It doesn't prove anything at all ... but that's actually a fair point.  It's easy to justify that one, however, no matter who you believe.

"Well, probably because they realize they'd been "caught" and decided it wasn't worth the risk."  (Of course, the same people who are saying that are also saying that the Patriots DID feel it was worth the risk beforehand, and these are the Patriots who got in trouble for Spygate because they continued doing what everybody was doing AFTER the warning came out)

or

"The inspection was obviously not performed properly before the game, which is why the balls started under-inflated and STAYED under-inflated, and that also explains why they didn't change after half-time either.  There was no tampering."

[GolfLug]

It doesn't prove anything at all ... but that's actually a fair point.  It's easy to justify that one, however, no matter who you believe.

"Well, probably because they realize they'd been "caught" and decided it wasn't worth the risk."  (Of course, the same people who are saying that are also saying that the Patriots DID feel it was worth the risk beforehand, and these are the Patriots who got in trouble for Spygate because they continued doing what everybody was doing AFTER the warning came out)

or

"The inspection was obviously not performed properly before the game, which is why the balls started under-inflated and STAYED under-inflated, and that also explains why they didn't change after half-time either.  There was no tampering."

They realized after half time??? Would they not have known that the balls will be checked (and corrected) at half time beforehand? So, now they are cheats and additionally either completely ignorant of this halftime practice or knew it and are just downright stupid to even take that risk considering the stakes?? Sorry, that's an epic stttttttttrrrrrrretchhhhhhh to my mind.

or

well...

[dsc123]

They realized after half time??? Would they not have known that the balls will be checked (and corrected) at half time beforehand? So, now they are cheats and additionally either completely ignorant of this halftime practice or knew it and are just downright stupid to even take that risk considering the stakes?? Sorry, that's an epic stttttttttrrrrrrretchhhhhhh to my mind.

or

well...

what are you talking about?

They deflated the balls before the game started or during the first quarter.  At some point in the first half, the refs took away their balls.  At halftime, they tested them, inflated, them and gave them back.  At that point, they probably knew they were caught and shouldn't do it again.

But this brings up another point.  If the refs took the balls during the first half, they have to have given an explanation right?  Either when they took them, when they returned them, or sometime afterwards right?  So we're supposed to believe that the refs never told anyone from the NEP why, or that the balls were deflated?  And that nobody on the NEP asked why their balls were taken?

[GolfLug]

what are you talking about?

They deflated the balls before the game started or during the first quarter.  At some point in the first half, the refs took away their balls.  At halftime, they tested them, inflated, them and gave them back.  At that point, they probably knew they were caught and shouldn't do it again.

But this brings up another point.  If the refs took the balls during the first half, they have to have given an explanation right?  Either when they took them, when they returned them, or sometime afterwards right?  So we're supposed to believe that the refs never told anyone from the NEP why, or that the balls were deflated?  And that nobody on the NEP asked why their balls were taken?

Sorry if I was not more clear.

According to my limited knowledge of this sport refs checking and correcting balls if necessary according to my admittedly limited knowledge is standard practice. Yes? My point is why would they cheat if they knew they knew would definitely get caught at halftime considering this is standard practice (and they would have known this before the game)? Would anybody in their right mind let alone a pro team like Pats do this knowingly that their act will be surely exposed at half time when the refs check the balls again?

And yes, to your next point I did ask yesterday in a post that why was nothing said AT THE TIME OF DISCOVERY - at half time? Where is that conversation? Should not there be something between refs and Pats ?

[dsc123]

Sorry if I was not more clear.

According to my limited knowledge of this sport refs checking and correcting balls if necessary according to my admittedly limited knowledge is standard practice. Yes? My point is why would they cheat if they knew they knew would definitely get caught at halftime considering this is standard practice (and they would have known this before the game)? Would anybody in their right mind let alone a pro team like Pats do this knowingly that their act will be surely exposed at half time when the refs check the balls again?

And yes, to your next point I did ask yesterday in a post that why was nothing said AT THE TIME OF DISCOVERY - at half time? Where is that conversation? Should not there be something between refs and Pats ?

The balls are usually only checked before the game.  Last weekend, they were checked before the game and conformed.  Mid game, they were taken out of play and then tested during half time.  That's not normal.  That was done because the pats were suspected to have been cheating.  The balls were altered after being checked, and no second check was planned.  So they did not know they would get caught at half time.

But I agree that they would not do this if they knew they would get caught.  That's why they didn't do it again in the second half.

[dfreuter415]

Simple solution. NASCAR's penalty for doctored cars is suspension of crew chiefs. Follow this example and suspend Bellichik.

On a lighter side: 'Sesame Street' Airs Episode Where 'Inflate' Is Word of the Day

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2339959-sesame-street-shades-patriots-airs-episode-where-inflate-is-word-of-the-day?utm_source=twitter.com&utm;_medium=referral&utm;_campaign=programming-national

[GolfLug]

The balls are usually only checked before the game.  Last weekend, they were checked before the game and conformed.  Mid game, they were taken out of play and then tested during half time.  That's not normal.  That was done because the pats were suspected to have been cheating.  The balls were altered after being checked, and no second check was planned.  So they did not know they would get caught at half time.

But I agree that they would not do this if they knew they would get caught.  That's why they didn't do it again in the second half.

Thanks. I stand corrected. Apologies to @Golfingdad All along I have thought this to be a pre-planned practice from last two days of lot of reading and couldn't wrap my mind around how stupid this is if intentional.

I still think this is all about preferences of how QBs like their balls - soft, hard, scuffed, oiled, etc and until now nobody really cared. Don't care about either teams (Redskins, Lions dead long time ago) really.

[Golfingdad]

Apologies to @Golfingdad.

Why?

The portion of my post to which you responded was not something I was saying, it was a hypothetical of what the "other side" would say to that.  That's why I put it in quotes ...

"Well, probably because they realize they'd been "caught" and decided it wasn't worth the risk."

And just because @dsc123 likes me , he proved me correct by making that exact argument a few minutes later, with many of the same words:

At that point, they probably knew they were caught and shouldn't do it again.

Soooo ....

Who's excited for the Pro Bowl?!?!?!?!

[GolfLug]

Why?

I guess no other reason than that I happened to be trained to apologize for any taken or untaken offenses. Happens to be the crowning jewel of my wife's many and considerable accomplishments.

[ghalfaire]

Don't need the link.  I have a Masters in Chemical Engineering and have designed products that use compressed air.  The biggest mistake people make is not using absolute pressure and temperature.  You can't use gauge pressure and degrees C or F.  It needs to be psia (gauge + 14.7) and degrees K or R.  Still, a 30 degree drop in temperature will produce about 1.5 psig drop in pressure.  It was 50F at the start of the game, but may have been colder at halftime.  The next morning was below freezing.

P1

P1 abs

T1

T2

P2 abs

P2

12.5

27.2

294

277

25.63

10.93

The "2 psig" was from an unnamed source.  No actual numbers have been communicated by the NFL.  Nothing has been communicated by the NFL, which is very disappointing.

Nice to know you.  I too have a masters in engineering (electrical) but didn't use the Gas Law much, if at all, in my work.

There really isn't a lot of information coming out of the NFL so it is difficult to assess what really happened but for me the temperature change required to get a 15% or so reduction in pressure isn't what happened.  I would have to think the retest of the balls after the game were performed by the same equipment and environment as the initial test for conformance was performed.  But I would concede that if temperature isn't considered in the process it could happen, and after all we are talking about the NFL not NASA.

But regardless of how it happened I would think that when 11 of 12 balls for one team were improperly inflated it was either equipment failure or a deliberate act by someone in the process.  Assuming the officials actually do test the footballs, then one has to believe that both the Patriots' and the officials' equipment failed and in the same way as to read the ball pressure as an almost equal amount more than actual.  That is just too much of a coincidence for me to buy.  So you're left with a deliberate act by someone.

Oh, just so you don't think I a politician who doesn't tell you where the numbers come from, I got the 2 psi number from a local news cast here in the Phoenix area.

[boogielicious]

I just did another calculation using the Packers/Cowboys game as an example.  If the Packers inflated the ball to the max, 13.5 psig, the ball would have been well below the minimum of 12.5 at the game temperature of 20F.  The NFL now has the problem of determining if the rule applies to all game conditions.  They test inside at most likely close to 70F.  In the really cold games, it will go below the minimum.

P1 psig	P1 psia	T1 70F	T2 20F	P2 psia	P2 psig
13.5	28.2	294.2	266.5	25.5	10.8

The same applies to really hot days.

P1 psig	P1 psia	T1 70F	T2 100F	P2 psia	P2 psig
13.5	28.2	294.2	310.9	29.8	15.1
P1 psig	P1 psia	T1 70F	T2 100F	P2 psia	P2 psig
12.5	27.2	294.2	310.9	28.7	14.0

[Golfingdad]

I guess no other reason than that I happened to be trained to apologize for any taken or untaken offenses.  Happens to be the crowning jewel of my wife's many and considerable accomplishments.

Well cheers to that.  But no offense at all was taken, so don't fret.

[dsc123]

I just did another calculation using the Packers/Cowboys game as an example.  If the Packers inflated the ball to the max, 13.5 psig, the ball would have been well below the minimum of 12.5 at the game temperature of 20F.  The NFL now has the problem of determining if the rule applies to all game conditions.  They test inside at most likely close to 70F.  In the really cold games, it will go below the minimum.

StartFragment

P1 psig

P1 psia

T1 70F

T2 20F

P2 psia

P2 psig

13.5

28.2

294.2

266.5

25.5

10.8

EndFragment

The same applies to really hot days.

StartFragment

P1 psig

P1 psia

T1 70F

T2 100F

P2 psia

P2 psig

13.5

28.2

294.2

310.9

29.8

15.1

P1 psig

P1 psia

T1 70F

T2 100F

P2 psia

P2 psig

12.5

27.2

294.2

310.9

28.7

14.0

EndFragment

This is probably the best explanation as to why its a dumb rule that I've seen.

But since I'm a hater, I'm going to spin you.  Remember that game you used as an example of the Vikes not getting in trouble?  They weren't cheating like the Pats, they were simply trying to keep the PSI in the acceptable range!

[ghalfaire]

This is probably the best explanation as to why its a dumb rule that I've seen.

But since I'm a hater, I'm going to spin you.  Remember that game you used as an example of the Vikes not getting in trouble?  They weren't cheating like the Pats, they were simply trying to keep the PSI in the acceptable range!

Does anyone know what the reason for the rule is?  I was thinking it might be more about the kicking game than anything else.  But who knows?