@woodypaige: Tom Brady should be suspended for the entire season for #DeflateGate. My take on @TheSportsShow http://t.co/heH8A7Alyb
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
@woodypaige: Tom Brady should be suspended for the entire season for #DeflateGate. My take on @TheSportsShow http://t.co/heH8A7Alyb
I agree with all of this - except the last sentence.bostonbruen said:
BTW, Kraft basically fell on his sword in his statement, didn't he? "I have problems with the report, no conclusive evidence, blah blah blah, we will accept whatever punichment the NFL doles out."
The expert report is entirely premised on a pre-game temperature which they derived from a measurement made on February 7, long after the season ended, and a setting in the referees lockerroom. It specifically acknowledges that even when doing so, it is possible the balls were all legal at the beginning and still measured what was recorded at halftime. It also implies (which is basic science) that if the temperatures were different, that the ranges would change. Thus, anyone who suggests the only explanation is tampering simply hasn't read the report.
Now, if someone wants to conclude that the texts and McNally's disappearance and the rest mean it is more probable that they balls were tampered with that is reasonable---but there's a reason Wells didn't try to go farther than that.
Now, if someone wants to conclude that the texts and McNally's disappearance and the rest mean it is more probable that they balls were tampered with that is reasonable---but there's a reason Wells didn't try to go farther than that.
Stitch01 said:
"Just get them nice and soft guys" would be enough. Not a directive to cheat, but completely in the realm of gamesmanship.
Yeah, gamesmanship -- like Rodgers tyring to put one over the same ball handlers and get the footballs at higher PSI. Like J. Johnson going through other teams' trash cans to get extra info, like turning off hot water at the old Sullivan Sta... okay the last one was probably not intentional but you get the point.
Regarding the 16 PSI in the earlier game, could this have come about via the switcheroo operation being conducted by the NFL guy(s) selling game balls on the black market?
Textbook case for how you can sink a firm. It issued to be just bad documents, then it became bad e-mails, now it's bad texting too.Stitch01 said:
As tragicomic as this is, you can kill a multi-billion dollar company with with bad messaging and a more-likely-than-not legal standard.
Well, at least this pretty much guarantees that any lingering post SB "glow" has been wiped dead clean off of every Patriot alive.
Ed Hillel said:
I've known a handful of people who have worked as part-time or volunteer ball boys, locker room attendants, etc. over the years, and don't believe it's unusual for them to receive autographs, equipment, even game-used memorabilia from players/coaches as a token of appreciation. There's probably an unspoken limit to this--I doubt the team's star player is willing to regularly sign and give away multiple items throughout the season to a staffer he barely knows--particularly if they're not personalized and can be easily resold on the collector's market. From what I've heard, Brady isn't exactly Bobby Orr when it comes to autographs, and is very selective about what and for whom he is signing. Although I doubt he has the same standards for long-time members of the Patriots organization as he does for the general public.
RetractableRoof said:
I'm not a Pat's fan?
I'm sick over this.
As far as the testing, I'm not going to get in a back-and-forth. Please read the Appendix carefully, particularly the part about time-based measurements...and how the Colt's footballs reacted.
The stuff that still has me wondering a little are the tests concerning accuracy/consistency of gauges (I'll have to re-read that section) and some of the deviations noted in controlled experiments. I hope others on the site can chime in on this and other appendix conclusions.
I'll defer on the text/phone/interview stuff.
Patriots get fined. Thats about all. NFL can try to suspend Brady, but they really have nothing more than circumstantial evidence against him. It's not sticking under appeal.
Absolutely not. I can't speak to the legalities involved, but I can speak to the "science report" from Exponent.geoduck no quahog said:
That report is a classic example of a document that is filled with numbers and analysis, yet proves nothing. I quoted some of the relevant parts above, but one key point is this: Exponent's conclusion that the balls were doctored depends on how much time elapsed from when they were brought inside to when they were measured. Getting this wrong by a minute or less changes the conclusion. And the number they used for this _was provided by Wells_.
Exponent wrote a carefully constructed report that is designed to seem irrefutable, while still being deniable if Paul Weiss gave them the wrong numbers.
No unbiased scientific expert would write such a strong conclusion, knowing that a small variation in their assumed temperature or latency could change the conclusion. Exponent is a litigation consulting firm. They are in the business of interpreting facts in the most favorable way for their clients. They deployed this skill here.
Pretty good article by Prisco of all people. Kind of exactly how I see it.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/pete-prisco/25176534/so-tom-brady-was-generally-involved-in-deflategate-kinda-no-big-deal
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/pete-prisco/25176534/so-tom-brady-was-generally-involved-in-deflategate-kinda-no-big-deal
If you read the texts they're hanging their hats on that comes after a game where the two men exchanged texts about the referees accidentally overinflating the balls and setting them out for the game (which would be exhibit A on just how vital the rule is to the "integrity of the game"). The obvious deduction is that on that occasdion when NFL officials violated the rule that McNally deflated them into legal spec.nattysez said:
Again, everything in the texts indicates that Brady likes his throwing balls at the lower end of the legal spec, not that he wants them under. And not that any of this even makes a difference. Because six months ago the State Farm Discount Doublecheck guy liking his footballs at 15PSI was an amusing anecdote. To be brutally frank the two most likely scenarios are that 1) the pregame testing consisted of one gage read followed by some squeeze testing or 2) the situation that Kenny Powers outlined a couple of pages back (i.e. that given the inconsistencies in how the referees inflate the balls that McNally tried to do a quick gage & deflate on the balls on the way out to the field). The seriousness with which the NFL treated the rule is highlighted in the texts about the inconsistencies in the various refs inflation practises. If it were really important the NFL would never have allowed the QBs to have charge over the balls' preparation.
SeoulSoxFan said:
JJ should have held out. The guy scuffing balls for Brad Johnson got $7,500
Stitch01 said:
He's asking the guys to do something specifically against the rules -- taking air out of the balls after they're measured. Not sure you just ask a guy to do that without needing to sweeten the pot, and you sure as shit don't do it casually. The guy was joking about "going to ESPN" to rat out Brady before the year even started -- what do you think he was talking about when he said that?
I mean, at some point the number of coincidences that would have had to have happened for Brady not to have been involved becomes untenable. This is like Serial -- you kind of have to decide that the wrongfully accused guy was the world's unluckiest person on the day in question in order to be able to explain away all the evidence.
Anyway, I've got no interest in continuing to harp on this -- the Ginger Hammer is going to crush Brady and the Pats, Deflategate will be all anyone talks about as Jimmy G leads the Pats in Game 1 next year, and whether we're right or wrong about Brady's culpability means nothing.
crystalline said:
Good (seriously)...figure 27 shows the most-favorable situation. If all the Pat's balls were measured within 4.5 minutes of starting to re-warm, the results can land within the edge of explanation. If the data used to create this chart is wrong, then Wells has a problem. We still need to explain how the Colt's footballs reacted to the same criteria (shown graphically in figure 29 - a conclusion I have a problem with, at least how it's shown). This is the type of discussion I want to have.
Also, can anyone explain figure 9 to me?
Christ I have a whole fucking room of memorabilia from the Morgan's Magic years because I worked security for the Sox part time back then. Somewhere I even have a Sam Horn autographed ball. Far from some international conspiracy it's sort of expected of the players that they do small favors like sign shit for the people that made their lives easier. (Except Clemons, he was a total fucking prick.)J.McG said:
Remember that dude from Sharp Football Analysis that published that bunk about the Pats fumble rates?
He's back and feeling vindicated: http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-wells-report-may-have-uncovered-the-tip-of-the-iceberg
He's back and feeling vindicated: http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2015/the-wells-report-may-have-uncovered-the-tip-of-the-iceberg
That's the crux of it, unfortunately.TheoShmeo said:
I assumed that TB had been totally prepped by Bingham and/or personal counsel before he got on the podium. Someone missed or omitted something quite relevant. Don't know who, but I imagine Kraft is just about pissing blood by now.
MarcSullivaFan said:
Brady put his name first for the NFLPA's suit against the NFL. I can easily imagine him acceding to the NFLPA's suggestion (if made) that he not turn anything over, even if it makes him look bad.
geoduck no quahog said:
Why do you consider warming for 4.5 minutes the most favorable situation? I understand that was the shortest time window considered, but why is that the minimum assumption you feel is appropriate? Also what do you think about the indoor temperature assumptions? I feel each of these assumptions do not represent the true range of likely possibilities.
As someone who has spent their career in analytics, its clear to me the assumptions are being nudged towards a desired result, and an overly strong interpretation of those results is being presented. I have no idea if the patriots cheated or not, and I will leave it to others to interpret the texts and other evidence, but this analysis to me comes nowhere close to showing the patriots cheated. Sensible and believable temperature assumptions can explain the PSI differences.
Apologies in advance if this has already been pointed out, but does anyone else find the following two passages from the report somewhat contradictory? The rules explicitly disallow the use of game balls during practice sessions, yet the Colts openly declare that they prep the game balls by using them during practice? Am I missing something here?
The fact that they used a private firm specializing in litigation rather than an unbiased academic institution to do this analysis tells you the goal was to argue a viewpoint, not to learn facts.
I work for a large company with a lot of litigation. I use exponent all the time. I have one epidemiologist that I use a couple times a year, at least. It isn't a boogie man. They are just very good hired guns.soxhop411 said:
Read then critique the report. I think their report is pretty easy to critique with just a little critical skill. A good lawyer would have a field day in a deposition with this.
But trying to diminish it's value because of who they are is stupid. Who they are are generally very smart people. Smarter than most of us.
My only concern is the -- eventual and unavoidable -- interview of McNally by some major outlet (60 minutes?) where McNally implicates Brady to cover his ass.
The report specifically states that because it was clear the Colts didn't have a strong preference for a PSI number they checked they were in range, but made no adjustments. Restated, it means the numbers weren't memorable because they were in range. If you don't have any recollection of exactly what the originating numbers were, it is USELESS to ask why the Colts balls reacted in any way at all. The referees couldn't tell you if the Colts were 13, 13.25, 12.75, they probably never even let the needle come to a complete stop because it was clear it was going to be around 13. They know what the Pats PSI numbers were because the Patriots specifically requested 12.5 and they had to adjust 1. They also only tested 4 Colts balls at half time. How many times does that have to be brought up? If they only tested 4 balls, they can't say conclusively that the other 8 didn't display characteristics that exactly matched the Pats and the 4 tested ones were outliers because they didn't give them the same pre-game scrutiny.geoduck no quahog said:
This is the most frustrating part to me... this BS of playing with the numbers by the league/Wells/Exponent in the interest of protecting the shield, when for the last x number of years the league treated Manning v Brady as it's iconic moment. I think given the commentary about Exponent that is out there, it is more than probable they gave Wells/NFL exactly the report they wanted - covering their ass with the faulty assumptions they were given. I'll say it again, it's misusing science in my opinion.
Has anyone taken the stance that McNally fucking hated Brady?
How did the Jet's game balls get to 16 psi? Assuming they're gauged prior to kickoff, wouldn't someone have had to inflate them more after gauging? Wouldn't that be McNally?
I can see one scenario where McNally purposely fucked with the playoff balls to get Brady in trouble. It's a stretch, but...is it even possible?
How did the Jet's game balls get to 16 psi? Assuming they're gauged prior to kickoff, wouldn't someone have had to inflate them more after gauging? Wouldn't that be McNally?
I can see one scenario where McNally purposely fucked with the playoff balls to get Brady in trouble. It's a stretch, but...is it even possible?
RetractableRoof said:
OK. According to the report, Anderson checked the Colt's footballs pre-game and found "most" of them to between 13.0 and 13.1 psi. He "believes" 1 or 2 measured 12.8 or 12.9 and that "it was pretty evident that their target was 13". So he didn't fuck with any of them.
1. Do we trust Anderson's recollection
2. The report already indicates quite a variance between gauges. What are the odds that the balls gauged by the Colts at 13 psi (with their own gauge, in their own locker room) miraculously conformed to Anderson's gauge (either the Logo gauge or the non-Logo gauge) - instruments that just between themselves were shown to have a measurable variance (something like .35 psi)...
That starts to look a little fishy, eh?
Rosey Ruzicka said:
Exactly. Not to mention that they go through this whole farcical rigamarole of signficance testing the differences between the Colts and Patriots balls without acknowledging that the test is based on their (dubious) assumption of every Colts ball starting at 13 as well as a baseline assumption that they were tested at the same time during halftime. They do the extra analysis of how the timing during halftime could or could not bring each team's set of balls within acceptable range but they don't admit that if the Colts balls were tested six minutes after the Patriots' balls, the differences in PSI between them are not likely to be significant.
Basically my view (as somebody who peer reviews a lot of research and is a statistical skeptic in general) is this:
-Relax the temperature assumption slightly or assume that the second gauge is the accurate one and it basically brings all or almost all of the Patriots balls within a range explicable by natural causes.
-Assume that some of the Colts balls were actually slightly higher than 13 to begin with or assume they had an extra 5-7 minutes to repressurize in the locker room and it probably makes the differences between change in the Patriots balls and Colts' balls statistically insignificant.
Meh.
Soo lemme get this straight, Wells ideal gas law says the balls should be around 11.5 and the avg was like 11.1 psi. And betweent the 2 gauges on balls there was a 0.5 psi difference at times. Aka we are within the margin of error of these gauges??
And hey, didnt the Pats win like 28-0 in the second half, after the balls were inflated? The post game measurements are the same.
And didnt the Pats win in Arizona against the Seahawks??
Soooo. Whats the problem again?
And hey, didnt the Pats win like 28-0 in the second half, after the balls were inflated? The post game measurements are the same.
And didnt the Pats win in Arizona against the Seahawks??
Soooo. Whats the problem again?
geoduck no quahog said:
I agree with your interpretation of the report for the most part, but I don't know there's really reason to be sick over it. Brady probably wanted his footballs to have a little bit of air let out, told the ball boys, and that was as far as it went. Ultimately, we're talking about like .5-1 PSI. I still don't even really understand why the limit is 12.5 to 13.5, and, as a fan, I really don't care what level the air pressure is at. He's going to get in trouble for lying, but as an offense, I really just don't care. None of it bothers me, including the lying, because I understand why he did it, assuming he did (he'd rather get suspended now than deal with Roger overreacting and suspending him for the Superbowl). I'm pretty confident that if the NFL wanted to spend 3 million bucks investigating all the teams of the NFL, they'd probably find worse for most teams.
soxhop411 said:
soxhop411 said:
soxhop411 said:
soxhop411 said:
Hey seriously guy, take a breath and slow the fuck down. This thread's getting enough traffic.