I agree.
Was this another example of the NFL saying something, watching the reaction turn negative, and then immediately reversing course and saying something else?
That as my first reaction to Pap. Let it never be said that the NFL doesn't care what people think (about some things).
Does Peter King prefer elastic waistbands when he's taking a post-Starbucks shart?
"We didn't catch anyone scheming to stick needles into footballs. No violations!"
I read the whole thing and I agree more with drleather's interpretation than yours. Instead of framing it like Schefter (and anyone with half a brain would) King takes Goodell at face value and thinks they really only did "spot checks" and that everyone was on their P's and Q's. In reality, it's almost 100% that Goodell made sure to test these things like fucking crazy and found nothing that fit their narrative so decided to bury it.
Right, it's classic NFL doublespeak. It could mean the balls were always between 12.5 & 13.5. It could mean they were within acceptable IGL range. It could mean they didn't see any attendants take a piss on the balls. It could mean NFL employees stopped stealing game balls to sell for profit. It could mean all the spot checks occurred in conditions that would be the least conducive to pressure loss or gain.
I agree. Roger and the league should be desperate for some kind of corroborating data. If they weren't "test(ing) these things like fucking crazy" he's a bigger fool than I can possibly imagine.
I simply don't think that is a reasonable interpretation of what King actually said; his point is that they should have done full testing to learn something, and that even if (note that uses 'if' there) we take the NFL at face value they badly screwed this up and the public deserves to see the measurements. I don't see how you can realistically suggest he's wrong about those things.
I don't even like King---I think he's a shill. But in this case, his take is reasonable even if we might want to see a more aggressive framing of his point
Of course they have the data. To believe otherwise is to believe they purposely conspired to get rid of the data. You have to actually try hard to not leave some sort of record. If I'm a ref sitting there at halftime, and the rules don't say anything about keeping a record of the numbers, after all of the shit that went down last year, you'd better believe I'm doing it anyway.
Perhaps Mike Reiss can be nudged to pursue the commissioner with this type of Q?
Roger will fill up the "State of the NFL" press conference with 45 kids asking questions about Play 60.
Yes, here is last year's video. We had a game thread for it here which I can't find. Another byproduct of the Pats not playing in the Super Bowl is that there's no reason for Glampers to take a question from the NE media.
Where we will all talk about DFG when there is an ongoing HGH scandal involving a quarterback playing in this year's SB.
Listening to Schefter over the years, he's light years ahead of all the other insider reporters in content and how well and precisely he imparts it. He's clearly very smart and I agree he knew how bad it looks for a reporter to appear "bought" and, even worse, have to keep up the pretense indefinitely as the rest of the world snickers.
If I recall correctly, Harrison, Poole, and Wilson all got hurt with Wilson going down on the long bomb to Muhammad. The Panthers' tying TD drive after that was against our secondary backups.
It happened during the Panthers' final drive. In the play by play log, Harrison is credited with a tackle on the last two plays before the two minute warning. I think the break came on the last tackle, a pass play to Muhammed. The next play after that was a 31 yard pass play that moved the Panthers into the red zone.
He broke his arm on the second to last play he was in the game, coming up to make a tackle on the RB on a draw. On the replay you can see him looking at his arm a bit. He couldn't get off the field in time and had to play one more snap with his arm hanging down by his side. He came over to make the hit on Muhammed and you can see he's holding the arm against his side as he does so.That was right at the 2 minute warning.
That link goes to Christopher Price's twitter and write-up. From that, here's the whole infuriating exchange:
Okay, so I misunderstood previous summaries of Goodell's answer. When he talks about "deterrent" he's talking about not being able to disclose which games they will check the balls. Well, no shit, Sherlock. That's not what people are asking for. We want to know when you randomly decide to check the balls, what criteria do you use to determine if a violation occurred? Of course, he goes on to say that the purpose of this new procedure is to look for violations, not to conduct a scientific study. No shit. Go back to question #1 you robot.
My distrust of the NFL knows no limit. They probably tested the balls at the end of halftime, indoors, after they had time to warm up.
