#DFG: Canceling the Noise

Is there any level of suspension that you would advise Tom to accept?


  • Total voters
    208

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,367
DrewDawg said:
 
He also said the weather did not cause the "deflation"/
 
 
The one thing he didn't empirically test.
 
 
 
I wonder if Weiss & Co. was Kraft's demand, and the Commish is miffed that Bob wouldn't trust the yahoos at HQ to do the investigation.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,558
Here
Again, he was assuming that Mort's report about 2PSI for all 11 footballs was correct. If what Florio reported is more accurate, and the other 10 were closer to 1PSI lower, he may well have said something differently.
 
You would think they'd run such an experiment at this point, though.
 

NWsoxophile

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,313
PDX OR
Ed Hillel said:
Again, he was assuming that Mort's report about 2PSI for all 11 footballs was correct. If what Florio reported is more accurate, and the other 10 were closer to 1PSI lower, he may well have said something differently.
 
You would think they'd run such an experiment at this point, though.
Or maybe have a look at the experiments that already have been run and say that weather is a plausible cause of deflation.
 

Rosey Ruzicka

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2013
457
DrewDawg said:
 
He also said the weather did not cause the "deflation"/
 
 If I were Bob Kraft I would hire one of the many professors that have explained this properly to do a media tour to educate the public on this.  I don't understand how many supposed "scientists" can be so wrong publicly and not challenged.  
 

crystalline

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 12, 2009
5,771
JP
lexrageorge said:
You are viewing this through the lens of a rational actor.  Through that lens, yes, the position you outlined is a very reasonable one to take.  There is nothing to be gained from any of the NFL's key stakeholders to bring the hammer down on the Patriots.  I've said this before:  neither the sponsors nor the TV networks care about ball psi.  The fans will still buy tickets and will still attend games if no penalty is assessed.  
 
But the leaks, assuming they are at all representative (a big assumption, IMO), indicate that Goodell has neither the interest nor the desire of behaving rationally.  I've seen too many people make the dumbest of dumb business decisions based solely on emotional reasons to believe executives are above such thinking.  And ego is a big emotion for Goodell.  
 
Yes and no.  The leaks don't have to be authorized by Goodell.
 
It's perfectly reasonable to think underlings dislike the Pats organization and are leaking.  And Goodell's main crime is that he doesn't run a tight enough ship to stop them. 
 

crystalline

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 12, 2009
5,771
JP
PedroKsBambino said:
A look at the Ray Rice investigative report shows how this looks---there may be criticism and findings that are not preferred by the client, but there also is a real attempt to manage criticism and the impression the report will leave.  A law firm investigation is not a 'bought and sold' view like an expert report can be, but it also is not a truly independent third-party assessment either.
 
Yes.  I thought the Dolphins bullying report was also a good example of this.  The report did a good job exposing the bullying behavior, but it deflected responsibility from the owner and head coach.   I can believe Paul, Weiss wants to preserve their appearance of independence, but I'd be surprised if they also didn't pay some attention to how their client would receive the report.
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,232
crystalline said:
 
Yes and no.  The leaks don't have to be authorized by Goodell.
 
It's perfectly reasonable to think underlings dislike the Pats organization and are leaking.  And Goodell's main crime is that he doesn't run a tight enough ship to stop them. 
They don't even need to dislike the Pats. Could just be a poorly run organization with a lot of leaks. NFL hasn't exactly shined with other crisis management situations of late.
 

theapportioner

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
5,069
If I were Kraft, I'd quietly conduct my own investigation and report, complete with their research data and outside empirical evidence, so that it could be used as a rebuttal to the NFL report if the latter ends up reaching a negative conclusion in an unfounded way.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
crystalline said:
 
Yes.  I thought the Dolphins bullying report was also a good example of this.  The report did a good job exposing the bullying behavior, but it deflected responsibility from the owner and head coach.   I can believe Paul, Weiss wants to preserve their appearance of independence, but I'd be surprised if they also didn't pay some attention to how their client would receive the report.
 
A cynical take is that the name of the game is doing a sober, credible, thorough, factually accurate report that somehow finds the c-suite executives (particularly the ones who hired the firm) are blameless.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
The local guys on drive-time radio here in the Bay Area (Tom Tolbert and Ray Ratto) had Steve Young on today. First, they all agreed that the whole "scandal" was not that big of a deal - they think its more funny than anything else. Furthermore, none of them seem to have a particular axe for or against the Patriots. That said, the radio guys clearly think that the Patriots did something to the footballs and that it wasn't the result of the actions of a rogue ball attendant. Young's only meaningful comment was that the Pats were the wrong team for this to happen to given the sensitivities around them due to past history. I only share this to illustrate how this story is playing out in a fairly neutral area.

The Pats cheated and got caught. Again, regardless of what the facts say, this will always be the perception about this year's team. Its irksome but it is what it is...
 

njnesportsfan

New Member
Jan 21, 2015
107
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
The local guys on drive-time radio here in the Bay Area (Tom Tolbert and Ray Ratto) had Steve Young on today. First, they all agreed that the whole "scandal" was not that big of a deal - they think its more funny than anything else. Furthermore, none of them seem to have a particular axe for or against the Patriots. That said, the radio guys clearly think that the Patriots did something to the footballs and that it wasn't the result of the actions of a rogue ball attendant. Young's only meaningful comment was that the Pats were the wrong team for this to happen to given the sensitivities around them due to past history. I only share this to illustrate how this story is playing out in a fairly neutral area.

The Pats cheated and got caught. Again, regardless of what the facts say, this will always be the perception about this year's team. Its irksome but it is what it is...
In the spirit of the discussion that has lumped "illegal formation" into the whole drama, if every team had followed not only the letter of the rules, but also the spirit of the rules, I would claim that there would have never been a reverse, a lateral, a fake field goal, a wild cat and even a draw play. Everything would be straight running or passing play, not deception of any kind. Then NFL would have never existed the way it is now and the revenue will be in the millions, rather than billions. 
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
Orange Juice said:
 
Love this article it doesn't start off with a "They are guilty" or " They are innocent" hypothesis or agenda. Nuanced science showing the rule in the book is a complete guess and utterly unenforceable especially give the change in ball preparation. In fact from a Patriot or Kraft perspective I think this current controversy can be seen as an inevitable result . 
 

J.McG

New Member
Aug 11, 2011
204
Jettisoned said:
They probably called Columbia because it's the most prestigious university that happens to be located in New York City.  It's also unlikely that tenured professors, particularly ones in STEM fields, are going to give a single shit about donors or anything like that.
I wasn't suggesting the results of a Columbia study would be intentionally manipulated because the physics department is worried Kraft might put away his checkbook (one would hope not, at least). More about the optics - if the results are anything less than damning for the Patriots, the media and average fan outside of New England will cry whitewash.

One view I hadn't previously considered came from Fred Kirsch (a Kraft employee for ~20 years) on today's Patriots Football Weekly podcast. He interpreted Columbia's potential involvement in the investigation as a clear shot at Robert Kraft, but didn't want to elaborate.

Taking that view a little further, and I'm admittedly stretching it here, a Columbia study could be a double-edged sword. If it happens to prove Belichick's ball prep & game conditions theory is bogus, not only does Kraft look like a fool, he'll be humiliated by his own university, where he remains highly respected for his involvement as an alumni and his generosity as a donor.

On the other hand, if a Columbia study fully exonerates the Patriots, the fans and media will cry foul over the apparent conflict of interest, thereby leaving the "Cheatriots" narrative to live on and the tarnished legacy of Belichick & Brady to remain.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
Orange Juice said:
 
So, and I may be wrong, but places doing ACTUAL LAB WORK OR SIMULATIONS are finding out the BB's story is essentially correct? And guys like Bill Nye and NDT, who are just kind of guessing at shit, were wrong?
 
Remember NDT's "correction" in which he said that instead of 125 degrees, the air would have to be 90 degrees? Well, that lab simulation showed rubbing for 5 minutes gets it to 86 degrees internally. Pretty effing close.
 
In short, piss off pop-culture science dudes.
 

jcd0805

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 3, 2007
3,959
Florida
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
The local guys on drive-time radio here in the Bay Area (Tom Tolbert and Ray Ratto) had Steve Young on today. First, they all agreed that the whole "scandal" was not that big of a deal - they think its more funny than anything else. Furthermore, none of them seem to have a particular axe for or against the Patriots. That said, the radio guys clearly think that the Patriots did something to the footballs and that it wasn't the result of the actions of a rogue ball attendant. Young's only meaningful comment was that the Pats were the wrong team for this to happen to given the sensitivities around them due to past history. I only share this to illustrate how this story is playing out in a fairly neutral area.

The Pats cheated and got caught. Again, regardless of what the facts say, this will always be the perception about this year's team. Its irksome but it is what it is...
That's surprises me, Young normally can't wait to knock BB. I think it stems from Belichick telling someone one time he hated facing Montana but loved facing Young lol
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
J.McG said:
I wasn't suggesting the results of a Columbia study would be intentionally manipulated because the physics department is worried Kraft might put away his checkbook (one would hope not, at least). More about the optics - if the results are anything less than damning for the Patriots, the media and average fan outside of New England will cry whitewash.

One view I hadn't previously considered came from Fred Kirsch (a Kraft employee for ~20 years) on today's Patriots Football Weekly podcast. He interpreted Columbia's potential involvement in the investigation as a clear shot at Robert Kraft, but didn't want to elaborate.

Taking that view a little further, and I'm admittedly stretching it here, a Columbia study could be a double-edged sword. If it happens to prove Belichick's ball prep & game conditions theory is bogus, not only does Kraft look like a fool, he'll be humiliated by his own university, where he remains highly respected for his involvement as an alumni and his generosity as a donor.

On the other hand, if a Columbia study fully exonerates the Patriots, the fans and media will cry foul over the apparent conflict of interest, thereby leaving the "Cheatriots" narrative to live on and the tarnished legacy of Belichick & Brady to remain.
 
This is all very plausible and makes even more sense when you think of Gooddell and the corner he is in. Both of the above scenarios result in him "winning" because even if the Columbia people exonerate the Pats he probably  can just go hunting for another scientist or group that will give him a more favorable ruling . Then in the official report simply say there was no consensus in the scientific community but I felt had to protect the integrity blah blah .... 
 

geoffm33

New Member
Mar 3, 2012
88
DrewDawg said:
 
Well, that lab simulation showed rubbing for 5 minutes gets it to 86 degrees internally. Pretty effing close.
 
 
Not just rubbing it, but rubbing it by hand. No brush or motorized/belt driven device, etc. Likely whatever the Patriots used imparted more than 10W of heat. 86 degrees is probably on the low end.
 

LoneWarrior1

Member
SoSH Member
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
The local guys on drive-time radio here in the Bay Area (Tom Tolbert and Ray Ratto) had Steve Young on today. First, they all agreed that the whole "scandal" was not that big of a deal - they think its more funny than anything else. Furthermore, none of them seem to have a particular axe for or against the Patriots. That said, the radio guys clearly think that the Patriots did something to the footballs and that it wasn't the result of the actions of a rogue ball attendant. Young's only meaningful comment was that the Pats were the wrong team for this to happen to given the sensitivities around them due to past history. I only share this to illustrate how this story is playing out in a fairly neutral area.

The Pats cheated and got caught. Again, regardless of what the facts say, this will always be the perception about this year's team. Its irksome but it is what it is...
 
The use of "past history" struck a chord with me. That phrase, to me, implies a series of events that show a pattern of behavior. Josh Gordon is an example someone/thing having a "past history." What punishments or reprimands have the Patriots received other than those via Spygate? Is it the case where once an organization breaks a rule, healthy skepticism towards all future charges is no suspended? Does the organization just live with presumed guilt in perpetuity?
 
To me the "past history" rationale is the result of several indirect factors including:
  1. The severity of Sheriff Goodell's punishment, pushing Spygate to the pantheon of NFL scandals (likely not warranted).
  2. The Patriots sustained winning.
These factors make it easier to avoid critical evaluation, like reading many of the links provided in this thread, and reducing the discussion to points that fit with one's oversimplified present narrative or perspective. The midday show on 98.5 is a prime example of this type of situation.
 

BimblemansLight

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
44
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
The Pats cheated and got caught. Again, regardless of what the facts say, this will always be the perception about this year's team. Its irksome but it is what it is...
 
I'm holding out hope. I think, if the best case scenario pans out and the NFL does find after thorough testing that whatever psi numbers they have were totally explainable and predicted by nature, they can save face by saying something like:
"we took this report very seriously. When we found the footballs were underinflated by x psi at halftime, after being alerted they may be underinflated, we were very concerned with an aparant breach in the integrity of the game. It was extremely important for us to investigate thoroughly and handle this situation with the utmost care and precision. We admit, as a non-science focused organization, we we unaware of the extent that physics plays on the natural deflation of the footballs. To make absolutely certain, we ran numerous real world simulations, under the consultation of some of the top scientists in this field. Additionally, to rule out any possible breach of integrity, we also investigated any possibility of conduct violation, including conducting over 40 interviews and reviewing hours of surveilence video. Our conclusion of this investigation is that we are 100 percent certain, without any doubt, that the deflation was caused entirely by natural causes and that no rules were broken by the patriots. Video of the experiments proving the Patriots innocence can be viewed at blah blah blah"
I'm certain a statement like that would silence anyone we care about, change the minds of anyone we care about. Everone else thats left, fuckem anyway.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,926
Wayne, NJ
The Fat Fuck calls the Pats serial cheaters

Even though as we all know, the ONLY documented issue of any type is the way overblown deliberatly misunderstood spygate.

The theory as in politics is to repeat the lie as often and as forceful as possible. Eventually the person spouting the nonsense may even believe it.

Denial is something misunderstood by the person in denial.
 

Carlos Cowart

Land of Enchantment
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
5,323
undacheese
8slim said:
 
Yes.
 
The draconian punishments for "Spygate" and "Bountygate" occurred almost entirely because people dared disobey The Great And Powerful Roger Goodell.
 
I've felt that the non-story of spygate was a function on a new commissioner saying there;s a new sheriff in town.
 
As a refresher - there was no rule against sideline taping up until 2007 and teams still do it from elsewhere, hence clipboards covering faces in every game since. Someone (Mangini) bitched to the league about the Pats, and the new commissioner issued a poorly-written memo saying that teams could no longer videotape from the sidelines "with the intent of gaining a competitive advantage in the game."
 
The Pats had their lawyers read that literally, knowing that they intended to use the video for an advantage in subsequent games, and then sent out their video guy to the sidelines overtly in front of 70,000 spectators the next game. 
 
Goodell was pissed the Patriot's correctly pointed out that he couldn't write a clear memo and he then sent the statement that they should have known full well what he meant by giving them the biggest penalty he could. You are not going to make the great and powerful Oz look stupid, even if you're technically right!
 
Which makes me wonder if Marshawn Lynch's not-technically-against-the-rules idiocy this week will go unpunished. Maybe Goodell has grown up since 07.
 

bosox188

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 11, 2008
2,916
Marlborough, MA
Carlos Cowart said:
I've felt that the non-story of spygate was a function on a new commissioner saying there;s a new sheriff in town.
 
As a refresher - there was no rule against sideline taping up until 2007 and teams still do it from elsewhere, hence clipboards covering faces in every game since. Someone (Mangini) bitched to the league about the Pats, and the new commissioner issued a poorly-written memo saying that teams could no longer videotape from the sidelines "with the intent of gaining a competitive advantage in the game."
 
The Pats had their lawyers read that literally, knowing that they intended to use the video for an advantage in subsequent games, and then sent out their video guy to the sidelines overtly in front of 70,000 spectators the next game. 
 
Goodell was pissed the Patriot's correctly pointed out that he couldn't write a clear memo and he then sent the statement that they should have known full well what he meant by giving them the biggest penalty he could. You are not going to make the great and powerful Oz look stupid, even if you're technically right!
 
Which makes me wonder if Marshawn Lynch's not-technically-against-the-rules idiocy this week will go unpunished. Maybe Goodell has grown up since 07.
 
Nope.
 
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000464631/article/marshawn-lynch-could-face-fine-for-beast-mode-hat
 
 
NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport reported Wednesday that Lynch could be subject to a fine for wearing a "Beast Mode" hat during his availability, per league source. It will be reviewed following the Super Bowl.
ESPN first reported the possibility of a fine.
 
Players are not allowed to wear brands that conflict with league partners on the field, during postgame press conferences and at league events, such as Super Bowl Media Day.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,429
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
The local guys on drive-time radio here in the Bay Area (Tom Tolbert and Ray Ratto) had Steve Young on today. First, they all agreed that the whole "scandal" was not that big of a deal - they think its more funny than anything else. Furthermore, none of them seem to have a particular axe for or against the Patriots. That said, the radio guys clearly think that the Patriots did something to the footballs and that it wasn't the result of the actions of a rogue ball attendant. Young's only meaningful comment was that the Pats were the wrong team for this to happen to given the sensitivities around them due to past history. I only share this to illustrate how this story is playing out in a fairly neutral area.

The Pats cheated and got caught. Again, regardless of what the facts say, this will always be the perception about this year's team. Its irksome but it is what it is...
 
FWIW, on this point, Young also said that:
 
(1) the fact that Indy's balls were fully inflated means someone let the air out, and he doesn't buy that "atmospheric factors" impacted the inflation; and
(2) there is no chance that a ballboy deflated the balls on his own initiative, implying that BB or Brady had to have been involved.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,274
“@GronkPartyBus: #GronkPartyBus coming in hot! Wheels still fully inflated. Nice work @goon356. Finish strong.”
 

soxfanSJCA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2005
117
Outer Space
riboflav said:
 
This is really great stuff and too bad no one will read it. Anyway, we can make it go (not really close but let's dream) viral?
I will send this link to no less than 10 coworkers tomorrow, all of them use Solid Works for modeling, believe it or not, i am pretty sure not one of them is aware of ballghazi.
 
 
 
nattysez said:
 
FWIW, on this point, Young also said that:
 
(1) the fact that Indy's balls were fully inflated means someone let the air out, and he doesn't buy that "atmospheric factors" impacted the inflation; and
(2) there is no chance that a ballboy deflated the balls on his own initiative, implying that BB or Brady had to have been involved.
I am just going to call all closed minded people that refuse to use their pre frontal cortex before speaking as  'Flaters 
 
I would have thought Steve Young would be reasonable and open to more likely reasons than cheating,
or to the possibility that this is not even an advantage at all.
 
10 days later, and everyone is still using "trusted insider leaks" to railroad the NEP.
Sigh...
 
edit: spelling
 

Rosey Ruzicka

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2013
457
nattysez said:
 
FWIW, on this point, Young also said that:
 
(1) the fact that Indy's balls were fully inflated means someone let the air out, and he doesn't buy that "atmospheric factors" impacted the inflation; and
(2) there is no chance that a ballboy deflated the balls on his own initiative, implying that BB or Brady had to have been involved.
This is so fucking frustrating.  I expect Steve Young to be stupid, but is every person that Steve Young knows also stupid? Nobody that he has interacted with in the last week can educate him on this?
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
S. Brewer writing for the Harvard Law Review in 1996 perfectly explains why this controversy can be kept afloat with just a bare minimum of facts... 
 
In a valid deductive argument , the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion.  ( Neither the Patriots or the NFL will ever likely reach this point in explaining what happened to the footballs)
 
Inductive argument the truth of the premises cannot guarantee the truth of that conclusion , when  they (ie facts/context)  are well chosen their truth can warrant the conclusions probable truth. ( Where the NFL and Goddell think they are given their leaked information)
 
Abductive argument the plausibility of a proposed hypothesis that would explain some event that is believed to have occurred suggests though it cannot come close to guaranteeing, the truth of the hypothesis itself. AKA The Bill Belicheck Mona Lisa Veto performance
 
The Title of this guys law review article is also pretty awesome sounding Exemplary Reasoning: Semantics, Pragmatics, and the Rational Force of Reasoning by Analogy .....   
 
One mans attempt at rationally explaining the unpredictable Roger the Dodger ....
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
No one has talked much about how the Patriots will prepare their footballs for the Super Bowl. With all the scrutiny that will be on the balls, they should prepare them as they usually do, keep meticulous surveillance on them at all times, and show everyone that the observations made during the Colts game could happen without doing anything against the rules. That might be the ultimate bird flip to the NFL. Also, win the game.
 

AardsmaToZupcic

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
292
veritas said:
No one has talked much about how the Patriots will prepare their footballs for the Super Bowl. With all the scrutiny that will be on the balls, they should prepare them as they usually do, keep meticulous surveillance on them at all times, and show everyone that the observations made during the Colts game could happen without doing anything against the rules. That might be the ultimate bird flip to the NFL. Also, win the game.
I was under the impression all balls in the Super Bowl were handled by the league, special commemorative one's to be given away/sold after the fact.  
 

Tito's Pullover

Lol boo ALS
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2007
1,634
Anytown, USA
veritas said:
No one has talked much about how the Patriots will prepare their footballs for the Super Bowl. With all the scrutiny that will be on the balls, they should prepare them as they usually do, keep meticulous surveillance on them at all times, and show everyone that the observations made during the Colts game could happen without doing anything against the rules. That might be the ultimate bird flip to the NFL. Also, win the game.
Of course the obvious problem with this is that it's not likely to dip below 50 degrees in Glendale, Arizona.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
Tito's Pullover said:
Of course the obvious problem with this is that it's not likely to dip below 50 degrees in Glendale, Arizona.
 
The Patriots prepared footballs were below 12.5 PSI at room temperature. What story have you been following?
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
AardsmaToZupcic said:
I was under the impression all balls in the Super Bowl were handled by the league, special commemorative one's to be given away/sold after the fact.  
 
That would be an odd thing to do, letting QBs prepare their own footballs every single game except the most important one. Surprised Peyton Manning has never used that for an excuse
 

Rosey Ruzicka

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2013
457
Until they can get the general public at large to understand the fact that bulk of the PSI drop was due to the outside temperature, and the fact that an NFL leak said "the Colt's balls did not deflate" does not actually disprove basic laws of how our universe works, I would not even touch the more nuanced point of their ball prep process slightly raising the internal temperature of the ball impacting PSI.
 

Tito's Pullover

Lol boo ALS
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2007
1,634
Anytown, USA
veritas said:
The Patriots prepared footballs were below 12.5 PSI at room temperature. What story have you been following?
You said, "and show everyone that the observations made during the Colts game could happen without doing anything against the rules."

The pressure changes from the Colts game are partially explained by the weather conditions that day, as has been discussed here basically since the story broke.

No such conditions will occur in Glendale. The forecast for Sunday is 70 degrees.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
Tito's Pullover said:
You said, "and show everyone that the observations made during the Colts game could happen without doing anything against the rules."

The pressure changes from the Colts game are partially explained by the weather conditions that day, as has been discussed here basically since the story broke.

No such conditions will occur in Glendale. The forecast for Sunday is 70 degrees.
 
The most important observation here is that at room temperature, the Patriots balls were below 12.5 PSI. The cool game temperature is a red herring here, the NFL isn't going to launch a huge investigation about ball pressure based on measuring the pressure of cold footballs. Aaron Roger's over inflated balls would have measured below 12.5 during a cold game at Lambeau. That's not the issue here. Everyone knows PSI will go down when a ball gets cold and go back to normal when it returns to normal temperature
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA

AardsmaToZupcic

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
292
veritas said:
 
 
 
That is still pretty ambiguous. Select from where? Can they bring their own balls that they've prepared like they normally do?
I interpreted it to mean they can select from the 72 the league will be providing  
Each year, 700,000 footballs are produced for official NFL use, including 72 that will be used in Sunday's Super Bowl in Glendale, Arizona, between New England and Seattle.
And from a Washington Post article http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/01/22/nfl-expected-to-review-pregame-chain-of-custody-for-footballs-at-heart-of-deflate-gate-in-offseason/

 
 
 
Under a long-standing league policy, the footballs used in the Super Bowl are placed in the possession of a third-party equipment manager beginning two days before the game.
 
According to Signora, Chicago Bears equipment manager Tony Medlin is to take possession of the Super Bowl footballs on the Friday before the game, following each team’s practice that day. Each team still is supply the footballs that it will use on offense during the game. But for the Super Bowl, the officials and the league, through the third-party equipment manager, maintain strict control over the footballs.
 
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,367
veritas said:
 
The Patriots prepared footballs were below 12.5 PSI at room temperature. What story have you been following?
 
 
??? You lost me here. Are you going with the idea that the Pats prepared the balls at something like 12.2 PSI, and the officials didn't bother to top them up to 12.5 pre-game?
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
Harry Hooper said:
 
 
??? You lost me here. Are you going with the idea that the Pats prepared the balls at something like 12.2 PSI, and the officials didn't bother to top them up to 12.5 pre-game?
 
No, they prepared them and gave them to the refs at 12.5. Whatever the Patriots do to the balls causes them to be artificially inflated (presumably heated), so when they eventually reach equilibrium at room temperature, they will read below 12.5. That's what BB spent 10 minutes explaining in his 2nd press conference. Do people still not understand this after 10 days and 11,000 posts?
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,367
veritas said:
 
No, they prepared them and gave them to the refs at 12.5. Whatever the Patriots do to the balls causes them to be artificially inflated (presumably heated), so when they eventually reach equilibrium at room temperature, they will read below 12.5. That's what BB spent 10 minutes explaining in his 2nd press conference. Do people still not understand this after 10 days and 11,000 posts?
 
Yes, but BB's observations about "excited" balls haven't been the story all week. Your post made it sound like there were PSI data for the balls as they went out onto the field.