Deflategate: Brady suspended, Pats lose draft picks & fined

[dead_poet]

@CharlesRobinson #NFL commish Roger Goodell said there haven't yet been changes to chain of custody of footballs, but he anticipates there will be changes.

[dead_poet]

@CharlesRobinson #NFL commish Roger Goodell repeats: Tom Brady's "non-cooperation" was factor in his discipline. Sounds like Brady appeal will hinge on this.

@TomPelissero Roger Goodell certainly seems to be doubling down on Ted Wells' requests for Tom Brady's texts & emails. Would he settle for some emojis?

[Mothman]

[VikingLord]

That was his impression but he doesn't appear trustworthy either so just how much weight should we give his impression?

I'm just curious on what you base that statement? The ball deflation data in the study looks pretty objective to me. Sure, Kraft and Brady's agent can raise the issue that ball pressure has never been tested at halftime before (probably the reason Brady thought he'd never get caught), but the data presented in the report and the conclusions reached on that point seem pretty cut and dry to me. I don't see Wells reaching conclusions about that that aren't supported by evidence.

[dead_poet]

@SigmundBloom @CharlesRobinson seems nfl is replacing a non-existent subpoena power with a "give us everything or its the same as if you did it" power

[Mothman]

I'm just curious on what you base that statement?

I see obvious bias in the report. The most egregious example is the way Wells disregards Anderson's best recollection of which gauge he used before the game so that the report can use the lower measurements from the other gauge to reinforce it's conclusion. Furthermore, the report glosses over the fact that 3 of the 4 Colts footballs tested below the regulation psi range on one of the gauges at halftime (and those measurements were taken by the official who took the higher measurements of the Patriots footballs at halftime).

Sure, Kraft and Brady's agent can raise the issue that ball pressure has never been tested at halftime before (probably the reason Brady thought he'd never get caught), but the data presented in the report and the conclusions reached on that point seem pretty cut and dry to me. I don't see Wells reaching conclusions about that that aren't supported by evidence.

A close reading of the report makes it look to me like that's exactly what he did. The evidence appears manipulated to achieve the desired result. Why take Anderson's word about the inflation levels of the balls pre-game and then ignore his recollection of which gauge he used if not because it was necessary to get the result Wells (and the NFL) wanted?

Peter King made an interesting point:

On page 113 of the Wells report, after a description of the scientific Ideal Gas Law, Wells says that the Patriots footballs should have measured between 11.32 psi and 11.52 psi. The average of all 22 readings was 11.30 psi … two-one-hundredths lower what the Ideal Gas Law would have allowed for balls that started the day at the Patriots’ level of 12.5 psi.

When you consider that pre-game measurements weren't recorded, that human error is inevitably involved, and then note the variation in measurements from ball to ball at halftime, two-one-hundredths is simply not statistically significant enough to arrive at the conclusion that air was released from those footballs before the game.

I also think comparing the picture Wells paints of McNally's supposedly stealthy pre-game actions with what the Patriots lawyers noted about his actions in their rebuttal makes Wells look even more manipulative:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-foo ... gs-to-know

As the report states (pg. 55), the sitting room was crowded with “NFL personnel, game officials and others gathered there to watch the conclusion of the NFC Championship Game on television.” Mr. McNally had to navigate this crowd of officials to make it through the sitting room with two large bags of footballs on his shoulders. Mr. McNally, a physically big man, hoisted two large bags of footballs and lumbered past all these League officials and out the door of the Officials' Locker Room. As is clear from the report, no one objected; no one told him to stop; no one requested that he wait to be accompanied by a League official; no one told him that a League official had to carry the footballs to the field. After he walked past all of these League officials and out the door of the Officials' Locker Room to the hallway, he then walked past James Daniel, an NFL official and one of the people who had been alerted to the Colts psi concerns pre-game (pg. 45). Mr. Daniel, as seen on the security video, looked at Mr. McNally carrying the bags of footballs toward the field unaccompanied by any League or game official, and made no objection to Mr. McNally continuing unaccompanied to the field. In short, if officials lost track of the location of game footballs, it was not because Mr. McNally stealthily removed them. (Omitted from the investigation were interviews with all those League officials whom Mr. McNally walked past with the bags of footballs on his shoulders.) Even after halftime, when obvious attention was being paid to game footballs and psi issues by League and game officials, who took control of the footballs at halftime, the security video shows Mr. McNally, with no objection, taking the footballs from the Officials' Locker Room back to the field totally unaccompanied by any League or Game official. Mr. McNally's removal of the footballs from the Officials' Locker Room before the game began was simply not unauthorized, unknown, unusual, or in violation of some protocol or instruction. The report nonetheless portrays Mr. McNally's departure from the Officials' Locker Room before the game as a step in secretly taking the footballs for nefarious reasons.

It just doesn't add up, Edward, at least not for me. I've really tried to look at the whole thing in an unbiased way and there are just too many red flags regarding the investigation and the Wells Report for me to find it entirely credible and trustworthy.

[Mothman]

Also known as bullying...

[dead_poet]

Warren Sharp defends his fumble analysis (new): http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... te-article

Well worth the read if you're interested on how underinflated balls may have helped contribute to the Patriots' win percentage since 2007.

[fiestavike]

Warren Sharp defends his fumble analysis (new): http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... te-article

Well worth the read if you're interested on how underinflated balls may have helped contribute to the Patriots' win percentage since 2007.

Interesting read. Patriots are cheaters.

[Mothman]

Warren Sharp defends his fumble analysis (new): http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... te-article

Well worth the read if you're interested on how underinflated balls may have helped contribute to the Patriots' win percentage since 2007.

I think all that's really needed to debunk Sharp's conspiracy theory about this is a little common sense. For example, the Patriots have shown a great deal of consistency when it comes to ball security/fumbles since 2007 and have been among the league leaders in that category during that time. However, every year, there are teams that fumble at a similar or better rate. The difference is consistency over time and it doesn't take a conspiracy theory to account for that. Continuity, system, playcalling, coaching and disciplined play should be more than enough to explain it.

I love how on one of Sharp's graphics he refers to the rule change allowing each team to supply its own 12 balls for offense as "Tom Brady's rule" when, in fact, Peyton Manning championed the rule change right alongside Brady and they lobbied the league together. Sharp has made a big deal about how outstanding the Patriots fumble numbers have been since 2007, as if they represent something truly anomalous and are evidence of cheating. However, consider this:

During the 6 year span from from 2005 to 2010 (Manning's last 6 healthy years with the Colts—he missed the 2011 season), Indianapolis ran 6068 plays and fumbled 79 times. Over that 6 year span, they fumbled an average of 13.16 times per year and once in every 76.8 plays.

If we look at the Patriots numbers over the first 6 years after the rule change (2007 through 2012), thus comparing 6 years time spans for both teams (with some crossover), we find the Patriots ran 6488 plays and fumbled 84 times (once in every 77.2 plays).

The Colts numbers are better. Gee, what were the Colts up to and why was Manning lobbying for the same rule change Brady wanted? It's all highly suspicious. I don't actually find it suspicious at all. I think it can be explained by other factors, as I mentioned above. Put in the simplest terms: good teams take care of the ball.

Sharp went digging for a conspiracy and presented stats in a way that made his argument look credible but as I've pointed out regarding this subject before, if the theory is the Patriots were cheating and the rest of the league wasn't, thus giving the patriots a huge advantage that's reflected in the stats, why compare their numbers to league averages, averages for non-dome teams, etc.? Why not compare the best to the best? If the playing field has been rendered uneven because one team is cheating, shouldn't that put them in front of everyone else and on a pretty consistent basis? The truth is, the Patriots have been good enough to lead the league in fewest fumbles just once since 2007. Two other teams have done it twice in that span (I'll give you one guess which blue and white-clad team was one of them).

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."

[Mothman]

Some of you may find this of interest. It's the fumble numbers and number of plays for the Colts and Patriots beginning in 2004. I started a few years before the rule change just to show that even prior to that, both teams had some pretty good numbers in this department (especially Indy). I also included the league leader in fumbles for each year. As you can see, in almost every season, there are teams with really good fumble numbers, stats comparable to or better than the Patriots' stats.

2004
Colts: 19 (7 lost) 968 plays
Patriots: 24 (13 lost) 1035 plays
League leader— Lions: 12 (7 lost) 949 plays

2005
Colts: 14 (8 lost) 1000 plays
Patriots: 19 (9 lost) 1031 plays
League leader— Colts

2006
Colts: 13 (10 lost) 1011 plays
Patriots: 27 (15 lost) 1055 plays
League leader— Colts


2007:
Colts: 14 (5 lost) 1020 plays
Patriots: 14 (6 lost) 1058 plays
League leader— Colts

2008:
Colts: 13 (5 lost) 969 plays
Patriots: 17 (10 lost) 1095 plays
League leader— Panthers (12 (7 lost) 938 plays

2009:
Colts: 11 (5 lost) 980 plays
Patriots: 17 (9 lost) 1076 plays
League leader— Colts

2010
Colts: 14 (8 lost) 1088 plays
Patriots: 9 (5 lost) 986 plays
League leader— Patriots

2011
Colts (Manning out for season): 24 (15 lost) 951 plays
Patriots: 13 (5 lost) 1082 plays
League leader— Saints: 6 (5 lost) 1117 plays

2012
Colts: 24 (15 lost) 951 plays
Patriots: 14 (7 lost) 1191 plays
League leader— Falcons: 9 (4 lost) 1021 plays

2013:
Colts: 14 (4 lost) 1023 plays
Patriots: 24 (9 lost) 1138 plays
League leader— Panthers: 12 (6 lost) 999 plays

2014:
Colts: 31 (15 lost) 1105 plays
Patriots: 13 (4 lost) 1073 plays
League leader— Vikings: 11 (2 lost) 981 plays

[The Breeze]

amazing to only lose 2 fumbles all season....way to go Vikes.

[Mothman]

amazing to only lose 2 fumbles all season....way to go Vikes.

Yes, that was the best number in that whole 11 year span I posted. Impressive! I wonder how many times in NFL history a team has lost 2 or fewer fumbles in an entire season. It can't be many.

[The Breeze]

Yes, that was the best number in that whole 11 year span I posted. Impressive! I wonder how many times in NFL history a team has lost 2 or fewer fumbles in an entire season. It can't be many.

I agree that it has to be rare. I checked...... the 2002 chiefs are the only other team
.

[Mothman]

I agree that it has to be rare. I checked...... the 2002 chiefs are the only other team

Cool!

Let's see if the Vikes can top themselves and lose 0 fumbles this year.