I'm holding on to the theory that the NFL is "angry" and "distraught" because the crew failed to check the balls.
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Except the punishment would not fit the crime, at least based on what's been reported. The team would get fined, Belichick would get fined. Potentially loss of draft picks. But the NFL would have a huge circus on its hands if it suspended Belichick for something that nearly everyone outside of Wilbon agrees is a minor technical rule violation.genoasalami said:
The only case where a head coach was suspended recently was when Payton was accused of covering up and hampering the NFL's investigation into Bounty-gate. That's the only scenario where I see BB getting suspended by the league.
I still don't see how the balls would have been deliberately tampered with after inspection, or why anyone would be so stupid as to try that. So, for now, until I hear more info, I'm discounting that scenario.
djbayko said:
I think we just disagree on how to construe the rule. As I read it, the team is obligated to make the balls available for testing. The referee might test them all. He might test some. He might not test any. He might give them a good squeeze to see if they raise any doubt in his mind, and then decide to test them. Or he might pass them, and then when the Colts raise a challenge, he might then test them outdoors, in which case the pressure might be even a little bit lower, and replace them. As I said, I think the likely point here is that the Pats took as much of an edge as they thought they could get away with. It turned out to be too much. Not a big deal in the overall scheme of things, but a rule violation, and the kind of rule violation that seems mendacious to the general public.
Live by the evil genius creed, die by the evil genius creed. It looks worse -- even if basically innocent -- because the Pats are known to be thinking strategically around the rules. Of course, so is Aaron Rodgers and everyone else. They just aren't as good about it where it counts. But the Pats are getting killed on this one where it didn't really matter (as evidenced by the asskicking in the second half).
I doubt the league would be "distraught" if all the balls in the game for both teams were underinflated.twibnotes said:
To me, the Patriots' explanation kind of matters. If the failure was simply that they didn't check the balls to make sure they were compliant, that doesn't bother me so much. Like if they just pull them out of the box, or a guy pumps them to what feels ok and they let the refs grouse about it if it's a problem, that doesn't bug me too much. If they instead deliberately manipulated them to a known out of compliance softness, that bothers me a bit more. And if the balls changed somehow between when they were made available for inspection and when the game began, that would be really bad.
I really hope whatever the explanation, the Patriots give a full, complete an honest answer. I kind of feel that's important, wherever that answer takes them.
Lemme just ask this: if it turns out the balls were all inflated to feel, and not PSI measurement, and then referees inspected the balls by feel, and not PSI measurement, and then everything went down as it sounds after the interception, do you still feel like there was something really calculated and nefarious going on? Because that's absolutely in the realm of possibility.
However, if they then incorporate "the next man up" philosophy and Josh leads a galvanized team to a victory, it would actually put a bow on everything they stand for.Laser Show said:
BroodsSexton said:
This doesn't jive with the embedded Peter King (I suppose different crews could treat it differently):
SoxinSeattle said:
I have had the good sense and fortune to stay in my SOSH/Football Central bubble since Sunday- but what is leaking in from the outside media in is beyond disturbing.
I am a scientist, so the answers to the questions I posed earlier are how competent technical people would approach eliminating procedural issues before tossing accusations.
If there was nefarious actions to gain competitive advantage then so be it. I still have not seen NFL ball inflation specifications, there needs to be a spec to enforce and i have not seen anyone post 12 PSI +/- 1 PSI (for example) and the testing conditions required to meet that spec. Testing with a needle valve can easily be a destructive test (pssssssssss....)
One thing that is for sure, the rest of the league is pretty sick of having the shit kicked out of them by BB & TB and is resultantly watching amusingly (or worse, fanning the flames).
The pain i am feeling now (and i am feeling it) is that of every reporter that ever asked an insanely stupid question to BB and got the deserving response- these terrible hacks have computers and internet connections and are making me feel the pain of their stupidity, the horror...
This is all one big free for all transference of pain from all the owners, coaches, and fans of all the losing teams with AFC and SB hopes and dreams crushed under BB's GOAT run.
It must have been terrible to be them, probably like how i felt being a Sox fan pre-pedro, or a Pats fan pre BB/TB.
My god, Slappy Mcbluelips got far less shit for hitting the ball out of saturn balls glove... Sheesh
lexrageorge said:
That PDF you're citing says 8 balls for kicking, but the rulebook I cited from NFL.com says 12 balls for kicking. The NFL can't agree with itself.
Freddy Linn said:
Yeah, well, if the crew did that to these game balls, then we got a real mystery on our hands.
Peak Oil Can Boyd said:
It's just not, though. It's like saying they do the lines on the field by sight, "yea that looks like a yard." There are specific measurements the ball must fall between, there's no way they're just sort of kind of pumping them up until the "feel" right.
This is the same commish that suspended Sean Peyton a year for "Not knowing" about an alleged bounty scheme.
I wouldn't be shocked to see him do anything drastic in terms of suspending Belichick for the Super Bowl. Especially if it would buy the man some goodwill from NFL fans, considering how much the Patriots are reviled by most fans and media members of the league
I wouldn't be shocked to see him do anything drastic in terms of suspending Belichick for the Super Bowl. Especially if it would buy the man some goodwill from NFL fans, considering how much the Patriots are reviled by most fans and media members of the league
Someone left a deflated football on my desk tonight. ( Southern California but the plant is filthy with Packers and Cowboy fans)
I had to laugh.
But yes. I think it can be legacy damaging for BB. Spy gate is on his tombstone. This shit does not help.
On the other hand, I'm not sure he gives a damn.
I had to laugh.
But yes. I think it can be legacy damaging for BB. Spy gate is on his tombstone. This shit does not help.
On the other hand, I'm not sure he gives a damn.
If you want to find out just how rabid other fans get in hating the Pats, just look at the shit Gano's taking for those tweets. Seriously, I am thoroughly gleeful how angry they are.RedOctober3829 said:
Love BB even more. As others have posted upthread, this game we love was never about this mythical level of "integrity". You say cheating, I say infuriating (if you're the other team) gamesmanship. Rodgers would agree even if some won't.
I'm wondering if this is headed in a slightly different direction – ie, "we inflated them the way Tom and Steve like them like we always do and figured the refs would tell us if they didn't pass inspection."Peak Oil Can Boyd said:
It was a lot more than "not knowing". Goodell felt the Saints coaches were deflecting the investigation in an attempt to cover up the violations. It was also a player safety issue, which is a bit more serious than deflated balls.Three10toLeft said:
I'm not sure why the other poster said that, but it still just seems so stupid to willingly and knowingly deflate the balls after the inspection. High risk, low return, all that jazz. There's also the practicalities involved. Not impossible, but seems highly implausible. Feel free to call me in denial.BroodsSexton said:
Van Everyman said:
Agreed. It won't satisfy a huge portion of the haters, but, combined with Rogers' comments, puts it into "honest mistake" territory. The difference is negligence vs. calculation; a $25k fine for former so we can all move the fuck on seems appropriate.
I still think this is a nothing story and that Patriots reaction will be something along the lines of 'we gave you the balls for testing prior to the game. You approved them for play. We played the game. You tested them again during the game and reported them as under inflated. We have no knowledge of why the results were different the second time around and we take no responsibility for any discrepancies. Perhaps it was impacted by the weather. We dont know. We just play the game.'
Except Rodgers's quotes can easily be understood as implying "calculation."Peak Oil Can Boyd said:
Because no equipment guy worth anything would let anybody else touch the footballs once the QB is satisfied with them. By satisfied, I mean rubbed up plus hardness/softness of them. That being said, most QBs aren't that neurotic and won't know the difference between say 11.5 and 12.5 psi. It takes a sizable psi swing to say that a ball needs air IMO.BroodsSexton said:
Ball boys who are Joe Blow off the street aren't going to be doctoring balls by themselves is why I say it. But the chance that an elaborate operation is in place is so small I'm not going to dignify it with much thought.
Ther's a big difference between underinflating the balls before the refs see them and taking air out after the refs have passed them.BroodsSexton said:
Despite what is commonly believed, Belichick has never flagrantly cheated in a way that would affect the integrity of the competition. The worst you can say is he ignored a new commissioner and taped from the wrong location in the stadium.
If he told the ballboys to take air out of the balls, that is flagrant cheating that if caught would probably get severely punished. And it is doubly stupid- because you just pulled a bunch of 20 year olds into your conspiracy that could act as witnesses.
If Belichick conspired with the ballboys in contravention of the referees' inspection, he deserves punishment. Because I think he is not a moron, I think he would not do that.
It is time to fully embrace BB in all of his glory. Any fan of another team gets on your case about this, just laugh and say "That's right, he is a cheater, and ya know what, you can't beat the fucking cheater, so while he is headed to our 6th SB, and your team is sitting on its ass at home." That is what is going to get me through the next week and a half.
Not gonna lie: there is a small piece of me that wants Goodell to do something like totally overreact and suspend Belichick for the SB, thus turning the story into a referendum on Goodell's leadership – and possibly teeing up McDaniels for the pinch hit win.
I have been an nfl equipment intern so I know how this works. I said what you are referring to.riboflav said:
pappymojo said:
I agree that this is likely to be the Patriots response, but I don't know if the NFL will accept it.
Most of this thread's griping about the handling of this story has been about the media and the NFL itself, for good reason, but the Pats PR people have to step up now. I mean, I get that Belichick doesn't like to talk to the media and if Kraft's lack of PR response to Spygate is any indication maybe he just doesn't care either, but if Belichick ends up having to waste valuable prep time dealing with the investigation (as he did with Spygate) because the NFL feels the need to respond to a badly-handled media storm, that's partly on the Pats. We can all say that this should really be a tiny speck of a story - and it should, even if the infraction itself is disappointing - but putting it in the right context requires work on the Pats' part.DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
The offense itself strikes me as analogous to being 12 at Blockbuster and asking your mom if you can rent a movie but not telling her it's rated-R - pretty good chance you get away with it, and if not, no big you play by the rules this time. I'm almost certain that barring any evidence of the contrary, the Pats will use the "balls were submitted before the game for testing and passed" excuse/line of reasoning. But there's no denying that it looks bad for a team that has been in trouble with creative interpretation of the rulebook before, and I don't necessarily fault those in here who are pretty disappointed right now.