Jed Zeppelin said:
They're sports journalists. They're important. How do you not understand how fucking important their job is?
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
They're sports journalists. They're important. How do you not understand how fucking important their job is?
It was like 10 degrees outside when the pats played the ravens right? I can't do the math but isn't it a pretty safe bet that both teams balls fell below the legal limit just from the extreme cold? I'd love to hear Chris canty's reaction to that.
Climate change is only controversial because it stands to cost a lot of energy companies A LOT of money. So every fossil fuel company funds politicians, lobbyists and advocacy think tanks that deny climate change. Same with cigarettes causing cancer before a decade ago- the science there was clear too.djbayko said:
Here, there's no one spending big dollars to deny the ideal gas law. I promise you, if there was a lot of money to be made by denying the ideal gas law, there'd be a faux debate about that too.
So if it's established that each ball would have dropped by about 1.8 psi and the Colts balls were either checked at halftime or the end of the game to be okay...doesn't that mean that their starting pressure would have been above the 13.5 threshold?
koufax32 said:
Remember, the Pats balls are dependent on the specific procedure they used to rub them down/prepare them. If the Colts don't prepare the balls the same way theirs won't be affected the same way once inflated.
crystalline said:
Yes, you're right there's a lot of that too. But the public at large has not educated themselves on climate change. Instead, they follow party lines and/or their intuition ("Global warming? I can't remember a year with this much snow.")
The point is that, whatever the underlying reason or reasons, you agree it would be foolish for the NFL to trot out "scientists" debating this phenomenon.
koufax32 said:
Not necessarily. Again, besides weather, Belichick cited differences in pressure due to game ball preparation and gauge precision, among other things. But, the Colts ball would be towards the higher end of the range for sure.
We have yet to see the numbers though and a lot of media leaks from this week have proven to be bullshit, so it's precarious for people to keep hanging their hat on the Colts ball pressure readings.
Of course not. That would run against the previously decided narrative that Belichick is an evil cheater. And every story needs an antagonist. And that is what news has become, not reporting, but entertainment with a story that must be performed. Reality TV meet reality TV news. Where there is not an antagonist, create one; where there is not a story, create one. How else can they make money?koufax32 said:
Two other factors: first, exposure to rain would increase deflation by reducing surface temperature, so the number of balls Indy used and the amount of exposure (time on field) could play in. Second, if they were only tested at the end of the game, inside and long enough after play, they could have readjusted to the controlled conditions that they were originally checked in (just as the Patriots balls were still OK when tested at the end of the game).Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
The reason that CO2 is called a greenhouse gas is taught in the same high school class as the ideal gas law. The public hasn't educated themselves on anything, that's why you can have a week long debate about the ideal gas law between physicists and former NFL lineman.djbayko said:
kieckeredinthehead said:
It's not the science itself but the application of that science. Climate change deniers don't debate that greenhouse gases exist; they debate that humans are having a significant effect. Similarly, NFL lineman have not been debating whether the ideal gas law exists.
Yup. My choice too. I always thought BB was misunderstood by most of the country, and today cemented that in my mind. I beame a huge Belichik fan today, and I think it will forever change the way I look at all he has done, said, and not said.Harry Hooper said:
Kevin Clark @KevinClarkWSJ 25m25 minutes ago
I've received 15+ emails from professors about Belichick's explanation and all of them say different things. That clears it up thanks.
I've received 15+ emails from professors about Belichick's explanation and all of them say different things. That clears it up thanks.
He's never cashed in on his clout or visibility. I wish he would, just this once, but I don't think it's his style,Punchado said:
For all of his success he seems like a pretty low key guy, but it would be great for him to just have a "fuck you" PC.
ESPN - doing what they do worst. What a fuck-up on their part. Wow.
ESPN Pulls ‘Sports Science: Deflate-Gate’ Clip Exonerating Patriots [VIDEO]
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/24/espn-pulls-sports-science-deflate-gate-clip-exonerating-patriots-video/
ESPN Pulls ‘Sports Science: Deflate-Gate’ Clip Exonerating Patriots [VIDEO]
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/24/espn-pulls-sports-science-deflate-gate-clip-exonerating-patriots-video/
As I understood Belichick, he was saying that what they do before the game causes inflation tin the psi -- that is makes it higher than a ball that had been sitting in a room all night would, so that when the official measures it or inflated it or deflates it to 12.5, it stll has room to drop over the next 2 hours that it sits in a bag in the officials' locker room. So now it starts the game already lowet than 12.5, and colder temps bring it even further.
We don't know if the Colts' balls stayed static, just that they stayed in range.
If the Colts' balls did stay static despite a 25 degree temp drop, then they defied physics unless some other process warmed the air inside.
So, when everyone reports "stayed the same," they likely mean "stayed in range".
The last point Bill was getting at was I think a pretty important one. They were basically asking him what they should do about the balls next week, and I think his point was that fluctuation is not just natural but inevitable, and if playing with balls in a 1 lb. range is what you hope to achieve, it's unachievable, or certainly not being achieved right now. Two identical balls prepared in identical ways and measured exactly the same indoors 2.5 hours before a game will have a nearly 2 psi difference if a game is in Green Bay instead of San Diego. So, the NFL is not playimg games with the same balls. And if the Green Bay ball starts at the low part of the accepted range and the San Diego ball at the high end, you are at nearly a 3 psi difference. If Bill is right that you can affect a ball temporarily another 1 psi by how you prepare it, this is a 4 psi difference.
The rule is written and this whole procedure is created as though a 1 lb. range is sacrosanct. I think what Bill was saying is that if your goal is to get 12.5 to 13.5 balls at one exact moment in time 2.5 hours before the game in a contolled 70 degree environment, then congratulations. Your rule and your referee procedure are perfect. But if your goal is to PLAY with balls that are 12.5 to 13.5, your rule sucks, and worse all you dipshits who think they are the same thing just cost me a week of my life I will never get back.
We don't know if the Colts' balls stayed static, just that they stayed in range.
If the Colts' balls did stay static despite a 25 degree temp drop, then they defied physics unless some other process warmed the air inside.
So, when everyone reports "stayed the same," they likely mean "stayed in range".
The last point Bill was getting at was I think a pretty important one. They were basically asking him what they should do about the balls next week, and I think his point was that fluctuation is not just natural but inevitable, and if playing with balls in a 1 lb. range is what you hope to achieve, it's unachievable, or certainly not being achieved right now. Two identical balls prepared in identical ways and measured exactly the same indoors 2.5 hours before a game will have a nearly 2 psi difference if a game is in Green Bay instead of San Diego. So, the NFL is not playimg games with the same balls. And if the Green Bay ball starts at the low part of the accepted range and the San Diego ball at the high end, you are at nearly a 3 psi difference. If Bill is right that you can affect a ball temporarily another 1 psi by how you prepare it, this is a 4 psi difference.
The rule is written and this whole procedure is created as though a 1 lb. range is sacrosanct. I think what Bill was saying is that if your goal is to get 12.5 to 13.5 balls at one exact moment in time 2.5 hours before the game in a contolled 70 degree environment, then congratulations. Your rule and your referee procedure are perfect. But if your goal is to PLAY with balls that are 12.5 to 13.5, your rule sucks, and worse all you dipshits who think they are the same thing just cost me a week of my life I will never get back.
Then let's hypothesize. Let's say the Colts post game reading was only 12.5. That would mean the pregame reading would have been at least 14...which would mean the refs helped them cheat or they never gauge read each ball. By letter of the law that's cheating.djbayko said:
BURN THEM!!!!!
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
I think it was warmer than that but the Ideal Gas Law was the first thing I thought of when I heard about this. I didn't bother doing the math but if the balls were inflated with a room-temperature gas, then stored somewhere where the temperature was, say, 30°F. lower, they could appear under-inflated, especially if the original inflation was at the lower side of the acceptable range. I'm surprised that it took so long for this possible explanation to appear.
Oh I doubt Brady gives two fucks but the thing I hope everyone takes away from this is that our "news" media has become a wildly irresponsible beast with zero sense of accountability. And so much political and sports and entertainment "journalism" now seems to despise the people they are reporting about. And it clouds their impartiality and creates shit storms of nothingness like this week.drleather2001 said:
Because they are protecting their "I'm With Stupid" gaggle of experts who would like mightily foolish if they were beaten down by science, knowledge, and truth. Yes, there is a cover-up here, and its not emitting from 1 Patriots Place, Foxboro, MA but from localities such as Bristol, CT.drleather2001 said:
koufax32 said:
You can't say that without knowing their prep regimen. Maybe they fill their balls on the practice field, at outdoor temp, so there's no dropoff for them. Maybe their rubdown ritual is shorter or earlier.
charlieoscar said:
It didn't. It's been talked about since Sunday night by millions. It's the first time that one of the principles in this drama has brought it up.
Nothing from todays press conference all the jokes are from Thursday's so they don't get credit from me for a quick turnaround.minischwab said:
If there are Patriots fans who are also climate "skeptics", maybe this can serve as a little lesson in the ways that the media will completely distort or ignore basic high school chemistry and physics, whether it's Boyle's law (1834) or Arrenhius' (1896). This has been a perfect low stakes demonstration of the science illiteracy and lack of critical thinking in the media. I mean, heck, some science people can use science to prove creationism and some will use it to prove evolution, so who could ever really say anything?drleather2001 said:
LaszloKovacks said:
The scary thing is that "fully informed" mostly means "functional knowledge of high school science". And not AP-level. Belichick did a great job, but the whole thing's more a testament to how ignorant the media is (willfully or not) than a case of anyone needing to acquire graduate level knowledge of physical chemistry or anything.
Well, you work in entertainment so you know better than I would,Punchado said:
But (based on my totally imprecise knowledge) I disagree that Brady doesn't care about this. He's approaching the end of his career, and I think it's only human to be concerned that everything you've worked for might get derailed by a complete bullshit story and bloodthirsty writers.
You don't think Brady wonders why Manning never seems to have to deal with this bullshit, despite the fact that he (Brady) generally shuns spotlight while Manning takes every buck he can?
I know he's far, far, more secure in his life and, for lack of a better term, spirit, than I'll ever be, but this shit would drive me fucking bonkers.